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

Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)

Expand Messages
  • etznab@aol.com
    I have the information recorded someplace about Marman s Rebazar Tarzs comments. I believe it s on a.r.e. someplace. Give me some time to find it ... if you
    Message 1 of 14 , May 5, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I have the information recorded someplace about Marman's Rebazar Tarzs
      comments. I believe it's on a.r.e. someplace. Give me some time to find
      it ... if you don't find it sooner.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Janice Pfeiffer <jepfeiffer@...>
      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
      <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 4:28 pm
      Subject: Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
      (Revisited)







      Prometheus,
       
      You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me.  It gives me
      peace of mind to know that others did have them too.  Thank you for
      being such a wise soul.
       
      Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted
      that rebazar was imaginary?  To whom did he tell this and why?  The
      circus of eckankar is mind boggling.  The more I hear from experienced
      eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand as an
      organization.  It appears like a house of cards.  Do you think more
      people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you think the org
      is losing ground?  I have read they exaggerate their membership by
      counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event.  Any ideas?
       
      Thanks




      From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
      (Revisited)
      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM


       
      Hello Janice and All,
      Interesting. I think I'll
      share some comments
      to your insights below.

      Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
      "Prometheus,

      Now that is very interesting.

      I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so
      before I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling
      in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy. My
      experience was that I was just before falling asleep one night and I
      heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember later. I know
      it started with a P.

      Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and
      then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but I
      was only half awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp. It
      was a strong male voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly
      looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood gazing at
      me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed. In my dream I
      told it to get out now and never come back. It did.

      Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as
      being a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the dreams
      were even more so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my
      favorite character. He seemed the most spiritual at the time. I found
      it very confusing to have these dreams.

      I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term
      relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions that
      got me yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck teachings
      since becoming an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was true
      beauty in the teachings."

      ME (Prometheus): I know that
      many of us have had similar
      experiences of being attacked
      by negative entities and having
      to defend ourselves. In this case
      your RESA was, also, one of these
      negative beings. Too bad you
      couldn't protect yourself from
      them, but it's deceptive when
      one has placed trust in a RESA
      by assuming they are always
      positive and always on your side.
      They are as closed minded and
      defensive as is any religionist
      when protecting their dogma
      from too much scrutiny.

      "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it
      attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading
      all the things I would not read as an eckist. It took me about another
      year to start feeling like a normal person. I must say that the attack
      seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of
      eckankar claim in theirs writings. It didn't appear to be a positive
      thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I
      wasn't conforming properly. I didn't insult people or even respond to
      them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many
      occasions when asked personal questions. Privacy doesn't seem to be
      respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories
      about the personal lives of other eckist."

      ME: Yes. One has to give-in and give-up.
      Some say, Let-go and Let-God. But, with
      ECKankar they will say to remain skeptical
      until you can "prove it" to yourself. But,
      the catch is that there's a time limit for
      being skeptical. True, when one seeks
      the "Truth" via introspection and uses
      meditation/contemplation one will change
      and see with new eyes, but that's not due
      to any fake Mahanta or borrowed and
      tweaked Sant Mat dogma. One will naturally
      dream and imagine all sorts of things
      when attention is placed upon these
      areas and topics. That's what Twitchell
      and every other conman knew and uses
      and what Klemp continues to use as
      a hook. It's a slight-of-hand deception
      the magician uses while the viewer's
      attention is distracted elsewhere.


      "I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind
      eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with
      demons. I am not sure demons are real and separate entities. I have
      always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or
      demonic that threatens their views so if I read what they have to say,
      I dismiss a lot of it. If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't
      have a reason to exist. This article starts out like most religious
      hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature
      of eckankar."

      ME: I'm, also, not so sure that demons
      are real. It could very well be that demons
      are metaphors for those things that bother
      and bind us to negativity, fear, self-doubt
      and even to self-loathing. Actually, isn't
      all religious dogma full of hidden metaphors?
      This is where the fanatics and the fundamentalists
      have problems since they tend to pick and
      choose what is easy for them to believe
      since they tend to be more simple-minded
      and tend to see most everything in literal,
      narrow, terms.


      "I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master and
      he thinks he is doing a lot of good. I think he is just the puppet for
      the more scheming higher ups. I really don't s
      see anything really outstanding about klemp at all. That was my biggest
      problem with eckankar. When I would do the gazing at the mahanta thing
      using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly looking man. He even
      looked miserable. I saw no power. He wasn't charismatic. He wasn't very
      intelligent and he had no creative ability that I could see. He like
      twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources outside of eckankar for
      spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to me at times comical. As
      long as he was being told he was the great eck master, he probably was
      easily controlled by the gang of money hounds making up corporate
      eckankar."

      ME: Klemp is the Higher Up.
      He had the by-laws changed
      after he took over from D.G.
      and neither the President nor
      the EK Board has any voting
      authority. Only Klemp can hire
      and fire. The local Satsang
      Societies and local Boards have
      been set up the same (As Above).
      Thus, the RESAs can hire and
      fire the local Presidents and
      Board members and the votes
      of Board members carry no
      authority! The RESA has the
      sole authority, unless, a higher
      authority at the ESC steps in.
      However, when this is done
      it is always with the approval
      of Klemp and under his direction.


      "It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by
      twitchell and others that the average person would think is not
      spiritual. I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great
      power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been
      removed from print."

      ME: "Difficulties Of Becoming The Living
      ECK Master" was the best book written
      depicting Twitchell's egomaniacal rants.
      There were three interviews done around
      June 1971 while PT was the full blown
      self-proclaimed Mahanta. What's amazing
      is that after all of these years he's still
      lying about his past. Klemp has stated
      on Eckankar.org that Twit was "exaggerating"
      and "twisting facts" to get into Kentucky's
      Who's Who and had never traveled all that
      far from home. Yet, Twitchell (in this June,
      1971 interview), is saying he was almost
      16 years old when he, first, went from
      Paris to India, with his sister, to be with
      Sudar Singh. There are more examples
      that are even more outlandish. Paul's
      comments about how he confused things
      and screwed up paperwork so that he
      could take it easy during the start of
      WWII showed a level of subversion and
      sabotage that even the Nazis couldn't
      accomplish!

      "I've never talked about the experience before because I found it so
      confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little bit
      nuts to even have those things. Any feed back from more knowledgeable
      eckist would be greatly appreciated. I don't know about demons but it
      was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking the chains of
      eckankar for me. They need more slaves to bring in recruits for more
      money and more influence. I wasn't doing that. I am thankful that
      although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did not drag a
      single soul into eckankar. Well, not that I know of anyway. Guess I
      wasn't a very good eckiest. I wasn't capable of it and I am ashamed of
      myself for ever being a member. Coming out of it, I think most people
      feel dumb, gullible and used."

      ME: I think that we all have to get
      over the guilt and shame of being
      tricked. Look at all of those who
      belong to a religion and donate
      time and money in order to get
      their "feel good" fix. Religions
      are types of opiates... Eckankar
      too! People need to believe in
      something that can give them
      hope and to help them to maintain
      a positive outlook. And, conmen
      know what people want and need.
      Attitude is, also, important but
      there's a fine line between being
      positive and being delusional.
      Sometimes it's difficult to know
      where to draw the line and some
      of us have more difficulty with
      seeing the good versus seeing
      the bad. However, I don't think
      that seeing the glass half-empty
      is always wrong, but it does present
      more of a challenge to overcome.

      "Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't healthy. I
      am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems. Some of
      them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot. Anyway, I
      was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe mental
      conditions previously or since becoming eckist. But why couldn't this
      great living eck master help them over come these things or at least
      help them adjust better to the physical world? If the living eck master
      had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is
      necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being? Why does klemp
      describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with
      a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in
      public? Not in my opinion anyway. Is it because after being proclaimed
      the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was
      woven into a spiritual experience as kind of a necessary ordeal? Did he
      go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in twitchells shoes
      and he mentally duplicated twithells experience?"

      ME: I don't believe that Twitchell
      ever needed to jump off a bridge
      and do a strip tease at an airport
      and choose jail or a mental institution
      in order to "find God." Besides, Twit
      was a liar up to the moment of his
      untimely death and, thus, was not
      a "spiritual being." It was all about
      him. Besides, many people have
      done stupid things when confused
      with life and have sought "spiritual
      solutions." If one chose to, one could
      claim that their mental missteps
      and episodes were "spiritual
      experiences" as Klemp has done.
      Klemp is merely doing a 20/20
      hindsight, and PR rewrite, to
      excuse his mental confusion.
      After all, HK's the leader of a
      church and has to be above
      and beyond reproach. It's a
      pretend game where he has
      to, partially, buy into the hype
      in order to seem authentic.

      "I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and who
      appeared to be warm caring human beings. Some appeared to be well
      adjusted people. Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this
      article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving. Maybe it is
      possible to grow in eckankar."

      ME: I, too, know and remember some
      H.I.s whom I like. They are nice people...
      as long as they don't know who I am.
      That could/would change I'm sure.
      They would feel betrayed and insulted
      and I could understand that, however,
      that, too, would be a "spiritual" test!
      To "grow in eckankar?" Sure, but it's
      not due to Eckankar or because of
      inner guidance by a fake mahanta.
      That crap just gets in the way and
      causes more codependency. Any
      growth or realization leading to
      an expanded awareness is learned
      and earned by the individual. It's
      their own personal and private
      relationship to the Holy Spirit or
      whatever one wants to call this
      divine essence, or not, that leads
      to a divine knowingness and to
      contentment!

      "I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings came
      from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several high
      initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply
      accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that
      the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed
      relevant at the time. One female told me, you take the parts you can
      use and toss the rest. I guess the idea was that with the teachings
      being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which
      ones to keep. Also, if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth
      wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as
      needed. Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this
      concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person. Lies should not be
      knowingly condoned."

      ME: Actually, accepting Eckankar
      while knowing about the deceptions
      and lies is rationalizing. It's like,
      if it's not broke why fix it? Or,
      why throw the baby out with the
      (dirty) bath water? Nothing, and
      nobody (Klemp), in the lower worlds
      of KAL is perfect. Thus, if it (Eckankar)
      works why complain? H.I.s have
      put blinders on in order to stay
      the course and maintain their
      prestigious positions which took
      them decades of time and money
      to obtain. Many have rejected, in
      part, HK's RESA structure and the
      ESA Guidelines. Yes, I knew of H.I.s
      that did the same... picked and
      chose what they wanted to follow
      and believe. However, that's not
      the way Eckankar is supposed to
      work. One is supposed to take
      the bait and swallow it hook, line,
      and sinker! Twit, supposedly, took
      only the best from all of the other
      religions and experts, etc. in order
      to create (or bring forth) the EK
      dogma to the modern Western
      world. Thus, how can one pick
      and chose when it's all, supposedly,
      relevant? If a person is not consciously
      following the guidance and the will
      of the LEM/Mahanta (Klemp), then,
      they are heretics!

      "I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other than
      eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as
      greater than anything else. They are under the eckankar spell. I still
      wouldn't want contact with them though. I just couldn't listen that
      eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel
      for them. It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them. So, I just
      remember the good and bless them in my heart."

      ME: True! It's nice to belong.
      Humans are social animals
      and most like to follow in
      one way or another because
      it's easier to follow than to
      lead. Being a follower requires
      less thought and energy. It's
      less demanding, less consuming,
      and is less stressful. It is true
      that the Higher one is with
      initiations, years, and titles
      the more lost that individual
      is. They've bought into it
      to the extreme. Look at Marge
      Klemp! However, the ones
      to really feel sorry for are those
      ESC staffers who know it's all
      a sham and Klemp is a poser,
      but they have to put on an act
      in order to keep their jobs,
      health care, retirement, etc.


      "Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar with. I
      will look them up but any info any of you can share would be
      appreciated. Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh? Are
      these really old names in eckankar history? Bill Schnoebelen was an
      eckist according to this article. The other two appear to be writers."

      ME: Doug Marman is an old
      friend of Klemp's who's an
      apologist for Eckankar. I think
      he's a 7th. He's got some books
      out there that have overlooked
      many facts and are based upon
      lies and hearsay. What's funny,
      however, is that Doug's stated
      that Twitchell lied about traveling
      to Paris, France to visit his sister
      when it was, actually, Paris, Kentucky.
      And, Marman's stated that Rebazar
      was probably made up by Twitchell.
      After all, PT needed to have
      someone other than Kirpal Singh,
      his real master, initiate him.
      Thus, PT created RT in order to
      initiate himself. Plus, Marman
      has admitted that Twitchell
      created the Mahanta title in
      January 1969. Yet, Marman
      omits all of this information
      in his books!

      "Telling my experience wasn't easy for me. Although I tend to be a
      private person, I felt a need to write it.

      Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus.

      May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful spiritual
      experiences."

      ME: Thanks for sharing this.
      It was interesting for me to
      comment.


      prometheus wrote:

      This is an entertaining approach.

      http://www.scribd.com
      /doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson

      Prometheus
    • postekcon
      Ekult was born in the psychic era of the 1960s, TM (transcendental meditation), visiting Ashrams by pop groups such as The Beatles, and even Paul Twitchell!
      Message 2 of 14 , May 5, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Ekult was born in the psychic era of the 1960s, TM (transcendental meditation), visiting Ashrams by pop groups such as The Beatles, and even Paul Twitchell!

        World consciousness has since moved on, but ekult is still stuck in its roots. This is why it is unable to recruit from populations today. It is no longer 'current'!

        Ekult's foundation was built upon conjured-up entities, they called them 'masters'. These 'masters' were brought into manifestation and are solely kept in manifestation today by the constant focus of attention of ekult followers. Simply withdraw this attention- nada 'masters' and nada manifestations!

        But more importantly, the mahanta entity (created 1969), is the psychic engine which sucks ekult followers dry of their energies. This is why HK constantly demands: think of me; think of me; think of me all the time! This is one modus operandi of how the energy is transferred, others are via the 'initiation' process and 'surrender'.

        Should an ekult follower withdraw their energy, or leave the movement, to explain in simplistic terms; the mahanta entity is most displeased at its pending demise, and what we might call a psychic attack ensues.

        -Postekcon


        --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer <jepfeiffer@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Prometheus,
        >  
        > Now that is very interesting. 
        >  
        >  I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so before I got out.  I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy.  My experience was that I was just before falling asleep one night and  I heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember later.  I know it started with a P.  Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness.  This wasn't a dream but I was only half awake.  The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp.  It was a strong  male voice.  A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood gazing at me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed.  In my dream I told it to get out now and never come back.  It did.  Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as being a thief and a con
        > artist.  The experience was weird and the dreams were even more so.  While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my favorite character.  He seemed the most spiritual at the time.  I found it very confusing to have these dreams.   I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term relationship with a high initiate.   I started asking the questions that got me yelled at by the area resa.  I had read nothing but eck teachings since becoming an eckist.  I thought while an ekist there was true beauty in the teachings.   
        >  
        > And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it attempts to break a person down.  I walked away and I started reading all the things I would not read as an eckist.  It took me about another year to start feeling like a normal person.  I must say that the attack seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of eckankar claim in theirs writings.  It didn't appear to be a positive thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I wasn't conforming properly.  I didn't insult people or even respond to them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many occasions when asked personal questions.  Privacy doesn't seem to be respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories about the personal lives of other eckist.    
        >  
        >  I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with demons.  I am not sure demons are real and separate entities.  I have always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or demonic that threatens their views so if  I  read what they have to say, I  dismiss a lot of it.  If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't have a reason to exist.   This article starts out like most religious hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature of eckankar. 
        >  
        >  I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master and he thinks he is doing a lot of good.  I think he is just the puppet for the more scheming higher ups.  I really don't s
        >  see anything really outstanding about klemp at all.  That was my biggest problem with eckankar.  When I would do the gazing at the mahanta thing using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly looking man.  He even looked miserable.  I saw no power.  He wasn't charismatic.  He wasn't very intelligent and he had no creative ability that I could see.  He like twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources outside of eckankar for spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to me at times comical.  As long as he was being told he was the great eck master, he probably was easily controlled by the gang of money hounds making up corporate eckankar. 
        >  
        >  It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by twitchell and others that the average person would think is not spiritual.  I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been removed from print. 
        >  
        >  I've never talked about the experience before because I found it so confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little bit nuts to even have those things.  Any feed back from more knowledgeable eckist would be greatly appreciated.  I don't know about demons but it was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking the chains of eckankar for me.  They need more slaves to bring in recruits for more money and more influence.  I wasn't doing that.  I am thankful that although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did not drag a single soul into eckankar.  Well, not that I know of anyway.  Guess I wasn't a very good eckiest.  I wasn't capable of it and I am ashamed of myself for ever being a member.  Coming out of it, I think most people feel dumb, gullible and used.
        >  
        > Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't healthy.  I am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems.  Some of them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot.   Anyway, I was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe mental conditions previously or since becoming eckist.  But why couldn't this great living eck master help them over come these things or at least help them adjust better to the physical world?    If the living eck master had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being?  Why does klemp describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in public?  Not in my opinion anyway.  Is it because after being proclaimed the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was woven into a spiritual experience as
        > kind of a necessary ordeal?  Did he go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in twitchells shoes and he mentally duplicated twithells experience? 
        >  
        > I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and who appeared to be warm caring human beings.  Some appeared to be well adjusted people.  Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving.  Maybe it is possible to grow in eckankar. 
        >  
        >  I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings came from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several high initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed relevant at the time.  One female told me, you take the parts you can use and toss the rest.  I guess the idea was that with the teachings being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which ones to keep.  Also,  if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as needed.   Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person.  Lies should not be knowingly condoned.
        >  
        >   I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other than eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as greater than anything else.  They are under the eckankar spell.  I still wouldn't want contact with them though.  I just couldn't listen that eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel for them.  It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them.  So, I just remember the good and bless them in my heart. 
        >  
        > Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar with.  I will look them up but any info any of you can share would be appreciated.  Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh?  Are these really old names in eckankar history?    Bill Schnoebelen was an eckist according to this article.  The other two appear to be writers. 
        >  
        > Telling my experience wasn't easy for me.  Although I tend to be a private person, I felt a need to write it. 
        >  
        > Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus. 
        >  
        > May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful spiritual experiences.
        >  
        >
        >
        > --- On Thu, 5/3/12, prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
        > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
        > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 12:29 AM
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        > This is an entertaining approach.
        >
        > http://www.scribd.com/doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson
        >
        > Prometheus
        >
      • etznab18
        Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why? Some select trivia
        Message 3 of 14 , May 5, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"

          Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original links/threads for complete context.)

          To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is still a long post though.

          (1)

          Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online book:

          [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The Master.

          The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicking the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today.

          So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had ever heard anything about it before. He immediately became interested, told me that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I told Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes I was sorting through, but I would run home to get it for him. I immediately jumped up to head for my car.

          It was at this point that Darwin said something that left me with a deep impression. He saw that I was hurrying toward my car in my desire to get the tape for him, and he said, "Take your time." He then paused, as if he was saying something very important, and he added, "There is never any reason to rush." [... .]

          http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Nine.htm

          (2)

          July 2001:

          "The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT my invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David Lane?]

          Kirpal "thought" Twitchell was denying it. How interesting. Why doesn't David show us the rest of the quote, which explains why Kirpal thought that? Kirpal makes it very clear that he is referring to The Tiger's Fang, which in its first draft mentioned Kirpal as Paul's teacher, but was changed to Rebazar Tarzs by the time it was published in 1967. [....]" - [Doug Marman?]

          http://tinyurl.com/4x3kl25

          (3)

          July 2003:

          Interesting, Doug. I have mixed feeling about the "plagerism". For thos most part, I see the copied info as generally either common themes or insignificant fillers. However, I find the quotes where he claimed to have come from Rebazar to have been done in really poor taste... and perhaps not a great move in his part ???
          What are your on that stuff ?
          I agree with you that plagiarism is not the real issue. I think the fact that many felt The Far Country was a transcription of an actual dialog means this matter of plagiarism shows them a very different picture. It means the words really came from Paul's pen, with help from other authors, and not word for word from Rebazar Tarzs.
          As for poor taste, I think it looks a lot differently now. I can look back at some of my early writings and see strong similarities with Paul's books. He influenced me significantly. Let's say I decided to leave ECKANKAR and start writing for some other teacher. Let's say I took some of my old writings and just re-worked them to fit with the new teachings. Now, somebody eventually sees that my writings are almost word for word from some of Paul's writings. Now it looks like I was "stealing" from ECKANKAR, and that the new teacher is just a spin-off.
          It's all a matter of perspective.
          I think Paul was clearly influenced by Johnson's books. He obviously liked them enough that he covered a lot of the same material, and even used very similar words in many cases, when he wrote The Far Country. However, he was also writing this at the same time as he handed Kirpal Singh his first draft of The Tiger's Fang. If Kirpal had not rejected his efforts, I believe Kirpal's students would have looked at The Far Country far differently.
          On the other hand, I don't really know what Paul was thinking when he wrote this book. I do like The Far Country far more than Johnson's books, so I'm glad he wrote it. However, I do think that it is a serious negative to his popularity in the public sector. I'm not sure Paul would mind too much about that. - Doug.

          http://tinyurl.com/7stz3vz

          (4) February 2004:

          "[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. [....]"

          http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264

          (5)

          March 2007:

          [...] Let me ask a question here: Do you have a problem seeing Paul's book, Stranger By the River, as a poetic work, rather than a factual account?
          Do you think that Paul is quoting Rebazar's actual words there? Or is he trying to communicate the teaching that he learned from him?
          I've noticed that a lot of ECKists readily accepted that Stranger By The River was a fictionalized piece, much like Khalil Gibran's works, but have taken The Far Country as something different.
          So, yes, when you come to realize that The Far Country is a similar work of art, rather than a factual account, you might feel that somehow you were fooled. I've seen people go through this reaction, and then it becomes a trust issue for them.
          I can relate to that. Although I always felt that The Far Country was much more like Stranger By The River. My reason: Paul is describing spiritual teachings here that are coming from a spiritual experience.
          These aren't things that come in English. They are inner teachings. So, I always thought these were Paul's words and his creation, but that he was trying to describe something real in the best way that he could.
          In other words, he was writing the classic "as if you were there" book, to leave the reader with the impression as close as possible to what it was really like. [...] Which do you think Paul was writing about? Was he trying to write about historical facts, or was he describing spiritual truth? If the later, wouldn't it be best to review his works in this light? Why worry if his facts are not exactly right?

          http://tinyurl.com/7tuzbwd

          --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer <jepfeiffer@...> wrote:
          >
          > Prometheus,
          >  
          > You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me.  It gives me peace of mind to know that others did have them too.  Thank you for being such a wise soul.
          >  
          > Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary?  To whom did he tell this and why?  The circus of eckankar is mind boggling.  The more I hear from experienced eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand as an organization.  It appears like a house of cards.  Do you think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you think the org is losing ground?  I have read they exaggerate their membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event.  Any ideas?
          >  
          > Thanks
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
          > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
          > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          > Hello Janice and All,
          > Interesting. I think I'll
          > share some comments
          > to your insights below.
          >
          > Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
          > "Prometheus,
          >
          > Now that is very interesting.
          >
          > I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so before I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy. My experience was that I was just before falling asleep one night and I heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember later. I know it started with a P.
          >
          > Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but I was only half awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp. It was a strong male voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood gazing at me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed. In my dream I told it to get out now and never come back. It did.
          >
          > Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as being a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the dreams were even more so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my favorite character. He seemed the most spiritual at the time. I found it very confusing to have these dreams.
          >
          > I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions that got me yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck teachings since becoming an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was true beauty in the teachings."
          >
          > ME (Prometheus): I know that
          > many of us have had similar
          > experiences of being attacked
          > by negative entities and having
          > to defend ourselves. In this case
          > your RESA was, also, one of these
          > negative beings. Too bad you
          > couldn't protect yourself from
          > them, but it's deceptive when
          > one has placed trust in a RESA
          > by assuming they are always
          > positive and always on your side.
          > They are as closed minded and
          > defensive as is any religionist
          > when protecting their dogma
          > from too much scrutiny.
          >
          > "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading all the things I would not read as an eckist. It took me about another year to start feeling like a normal person. I must say that the attack seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of eckankar claim in theirs writings. It didn't appear to be a positive thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I wasn't conforming properly. I didn't insult people or even respond to them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many occasions when asked personal questions. Privacy doesn't seem to be respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories about the personal lives of other eckist."
          >
          > ME: Yes. One has to give-in and give-up.
          > Some say, Let-go and Let-God. But, with
          > ECKankar they will say to remain skeptical
          > until you can "prove it" to yourself. But,
          > the catch is that there's a time limit for
          > being skeptical. True, when one seeks
          > the "Truth" via introspection and uses
          > meditation/contemplation one will change
          > and see with new eyes, but that's not due
          > to any fake Mahanta or borrowed and
          > tweaked Sant Mat dogma. One will naturally
          > dream and imagine all sorts of things
          > when attention is placed upon these
          > areas and topics. That's what Twitchell
          > and every other conman knew and uses
          > and what Klemp continues to use as
          > a hook. It's a slight-of-hand deception
          > the magician uses while the viewer's
          > attention is distracted elsewhere.
          >
          >
          > "I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with demons. I am not sure demons are real and separate entities. I have always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or demonic that threatens their views so if I read what they have to say, I dismiss a lot of it. If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't have a reason to exist. This article starts out like most religious hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature of eckankar."
          >
          > ME: I'm, also, not so sure that demons
          > are real. It could very well be that demons
          > are metaphors for those things that bother
          > and bind us to negativity, fear, self-doubt
          > and even to self-loathing. Actually, isn't
          > all religious dogma full of hidden metaphors?
          > This is where the fanatics and the fundamentalists
          > have problems since they tend to pick and
          > choose what is easy for them to believe
          > since they tend to be more simple-minded
          > and tend to see most everything in literal,
          > narrow, terms.
          >
          >
          > "I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master and he thinks he is doing a lot of good. I think he is just the puppet for the more scheming higher ups. I really don't s
          > see anything really outstanding about klemp at all. That was my biggest problem with eckankar. When I would do the gazing at the mahanta thing using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly looking man. He even looked miserable. I saw no power. He wasn't charismatic. He wasn't very intelligent and he had no creative ability that I could see. He like twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources outside of eckankar for spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to me at times comical. As long as he was being told he was the great eck master, he probably was easily controlled by the gang of money hounds making up corporate eckankar."
          >
          > ME: Klemp is the Higher Up.
          > He had the by-laws changed
          > after he took over from D.G.
          > and neither the President nor
          > the EK Board has any voting
          > authority. Only Klemp can hire
          > and fire. The local Satsang
          > Societies and local Boards have
          > been set up the same (As Above).
          > Thus, the RESAs can hire and
          > fire the local Presidents and
          > Board members and the votes
          > of Board members carry no
          > authority! The RESA has the
          > sole authority, unless, a higher
          > authority at the ESC steps in.
          > However, when this is done
          > it is always with the approval
          > of Klemp and under his direction.
          >
          >
          > "It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by twitchell and others that the average person would think is not spiritual. I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been removed from print."
          >
          > ME: "Difficulties Of Becoming The Living
          > ECK Master" was the best book written
          > depicting Twitchell's egomaniacal rants.
          > There were three interviews done around
          > June 1971 while PT was the full blown
          > self-proclaimed Mahanta. What's amazing
          > is that after all of these years he's still
          > lying about his past. Klemp has stated
          > on Eckankar.org that Twit was "exaggerating"
          > and "twisting facts" to get into Kentucky's
          > Who's Who and had never traveled all that
          > far from home. Yet, Twitchell (in this June,
          > 1971 interview), is saying he was almost
          > 16 years old when he, first, went from
          > Paris to India, with his sister, to be with
          > Sudar Singh. There are more examples
          > that are even more outlandish. Paul's
          > comments about how he confused things
          > and screwed up paperwork so that he
          > could take it easy during the start of
          > WWII showed a level of subversion and
          > sabotage that even the Nazis couldn't
          > accomplish!
          >
          > "I've never talked about the experience before because I found it so confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little bit nuts to even have those things. Any feed back from more knowledgeable eckist would be greatly appreciated. I don't know about demons but it was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking the chains of eckankar for me. They need more slaves to bring in recruits for more money and more influence. I wasn't doing that. I am thankful that although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did not drag a single soul into eckankar. Well, not that I know of anyway. Guess I wasn't a very good eckiest. I wasn't capable of it and I am ashamed of myself for ever being a member. Coming out of it, I think most people feel dumb, gullible and used."
          >
          > ME: I think that we all have to get
          > over the guilt and shame of being
          > tricked. Look at all of those who
          > belong to a religion and donate
          > time and money in order to get
          > their "feel good" fix. Religions
          > are types of opiates... Eckankar
          > too! People need to believe in
          > something that can give them
          > hope and to help them to maintain
          > a positive outlook. And, conmen
          > know what people want and need.
          > Attitude is, also, important but
          > there's a fine line between being
          > positive and being delusional.
          > Sometimes it's difficult to know
          > where to draw the line and some
          > of us have more difficulty with
          > seeing the good versus seeing
          > the bad. However, I don't think
          > that seeing the glass half-empty
          > is always wrong, but it does present
          > more of a challenge to overcome.
          >
          > "Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't healthy. I am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems. Some of them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot. Anyway, I was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe mental conditions previously or since becoming eckist. But why couldn't this great living eck master help them over come these things or at least help them adjust better to the physical world? If the living eck master had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being? Why does klemp describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in public? Not in my opinion anyway. Is it because after being proclaimed the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was woven into a spiritual experience as kind of a necessary
          > ordeal? Did he go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in twitchells shoes and he mentally duplicated twithells experience?"
          >
          > ME: I don't believe that Twitchell
          > ever needed to jump off a bridge
          > and do a strip tease at an airport
          > and choose jail or a mental institution
          > in order to "find God." Besides, Twit
          > was a liar up to the moment of his
          > untimely death and, thus, was not
          > a "spiritual being." It was all about
          > him. Besides, many people have
          > done stupid things when confused
          > with life and have sought "spiritual
          > solutions." If one chose to, one could
          > claim that their mental missteps
          > and episodes were "spiritual
          > experiences" as Klemp has done.
          > Klemp is merely doing a 20/20
          > hindsight, and PR rewrite, to
          > excuse his mental confusion.
          > After all, HK's the leader of a
          > church and has to be above
          > and beyond reproach. It's a
          > pretend game where he has
          > to, partially, buy into the hype
          > in order to seem authentic.
          >
          > "I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and who appeared to be warm caring human beings. Some appeared to be well adjusted people. Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving. Maybe it is possible to grow in eckankar."
          >
          > ME: I, too, know and remember some
          > H.I.s whom I like. They are nice people...
          > as long as they don't know who I am.
          > That could/would change I'm sure.
          > They would feel betrayed and insulted
          > and I could understand that, however,
          > that, too, would be a "spiritual" test!
          > To "grow in eckankar?" Sure, but it's
          > not due to Eckankar or because of
          > inner guidance by a fake mahanta.
          > That crap just gets in the way and
          > causes more codependency. Any
          > growth or realization leading to
          > an expanded awareness is learned
          > and earned by the individual. It's
          > their own personal and private
          > relationship to the Holy Spirit or
          > whatever one wants to call this
          > divine essence, or not, that leads
          > to a divine knowingness and to
          > contentment!
          >
          > "I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings came from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several high initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed relevant at the time. One female told me, you take the parts you can use and toss the rest. I guess the idea was that with the teachings being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which ones to keep. Also, if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as needed. Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person. Lies should not be knowingly condoned."
          >
          > ME: Actually, accepting Eckankar
          > while knowing about the deceptions
          > and lies is rationalizing. It's like,
          > if it's not broke why fix it? Or,
          > why throw the baby out with the
          > (dirty) bath water? Nothing, and
          > nobody (Klemp), in the lower worlds
          > of KAL is perfect. Thus, if it (Eckankar)
          > works why complain? H.I.s have
          > put blinders on in order to stay
          > the course and maintain their
          > prestigious positions which took
          > them decades of time and money
          > to obtain. Many have rejected, in
          > part, HK's RESA structure and the
          > ESA Guidelines. Yes, I knew of H.I.s
          > that did the same... picked and
          > chose what they wanted to follow
          > and believe. However, that's not
          > the way Eckankar is supposed to
          > work. One is supposed to take
          > the bait and swallow it hook, line,
          > and sinker! Twit, supposedly, took
          > only the best from all of the other
          > religions and experts, etc. in order
          > to create (or bring forth) the EK
          > dogma to the modern Western
          > world. Thus, how can one pick
          > and chose when it's all, supposedly,
          > relevant? If a person is not consciously
          > following the guidance and the will
          > of the LEM/Mahanta (Klemp), then,
          > they are heretics!
          >
          > "I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other than eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as greater than anything else. They are under the eckankar spell. I still wouldn't want contact with them though. I just couldn't listen that eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel for them. It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them. So, I just remember the good and bless them in my heart."
          >
          > ME: True! It's nice to belong.
          > Humans are social animals
          > and most like to follow in
          > one way or another because
          > it's easier to follow than to
          > lead. Being a follower requires
          > less thought and energy. It's
          > less demanding, less consuming,
          > and is less stressful. It is true
          > that the Higher one is with
          > initiations, years, and titles
          > the more lost that individual
          > is. They've bought into it
          > to the extreme. Look at Marge
          > Klemp! However, the ones
          > to really feel sorry for are those
          > ESC staffers who know it's all
          > a sham and Klemp is a poser,
          > but they have to put on an act
          > in order to keep their jobs,
          > health care, retirement, etc.
          >
          >
          > "Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar with. I will look them up but any info any of you can share would be appreciated. Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh? Are these really old names in eckankar history? Bill Schnoebelen was an eckist according to this article. The other two appear to be writers."
          >
          > ME: Doug Marman is an old
          > friend of Klemp's who's an
          > apologist for Eckankar. I think
          > he's a 7th. He's got some books
          > out there that have overlooked
          > many facts and are based upon
          > lies and hearsay. What's funny,
          > however, is that Doug's stated
          > that Twitchell lied about traveling
          > to Paris, France to visit his sister
          > when it was, actually, Paris, Kentucky.
          > And, Marman's stated that Rebazar
          > was probably made up by Twitchell.
          > After all, PT needed to have
          > someone other than Kirpal Singh,
          > his real master, initiate him.
          > Thus, PT created RT in order to
          > initiate himself. Plus, Marman
          > has admitted that Twitchell
          > created the Mahanta title in
          > January 1969. Yet, Marman
          > omits all of this information
          > in his books!
          >
          > "Telling my experience wasn't easy for me. Although I tend to be a private person, I felt a need to write it.
          >
          > Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus.
          >
          > May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful spiritual experiences."
          >
          > ME: Thanks for sharing this.
          > It was interesting for me to
          > comment.
          >
          >
          > prometheus wrote:
          >
          > This is an entertaining approach.
          >
          > http://www.scribd.com/doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson
          >
          > Prometheus
          >
        • prometheus_973
          BTW- Nacal and Usually Skeptical is (me) Prometheus: A Calm And Peaceful Message For All Please read this message in the calm and peaceful tone in which it is
          Message 4 of 14 , May 5, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            BTW- Nacal and Usually Skeptical is (me) Prometheus:



            A Calm And Peaceful Message For All


            Please read this message in the calm and peaceful tone in which it is being
            typed. I have really been for the most part enjoying the dialogue on this message
            board.

            I would like to encourage Doug Marman to continue posting here. I think
            gradually we can all learn something that will help us move toward a greater
            understanding.

            We can do this together regardless of religious belief and possibly emerge in
            a place with no fences. I have many friends from different beliefs and something
            I have noticed in the last 10 years or so is that our differences don't separate
            us as much as they used to. There is a coming together of sorts and a move
            towards higher conciousness.

            I have seen this come about through heartfelt sharing of ideas.

            ***A question for Doug. Is Patti Simpson still an Eckist?

            I send all who read this my love

            Freeman


            Joey Ward
            02/09/2004
            Top

            Thanks Doug



            Thank you very much for the reply to the 5 questions that I asked of you. Also
            thanks for looking through Paul Twitchell's writings and finding the same thing that I
            found out about Paul not using the term MAHANTA until January 1969. It means a lot to me that you answered that question I ask a while back. I join Eckankar because the
            Mahanta was the highest state of consciousness in this world and in the inner
            worlds so said Paul Twitchell the 971st MAHANTA (the title he gave himself). I
            still wonder why Paul would say such a thing. To me this is the biggest lie that
            any person could say. To make up a line of Mahanta Masters, (highest state of
            consciousness and God made flesh) what was Paul thinking of. O' well !!! I
            guess the next time I see Paul in the astral library I will give him a kick in
            the pants.

            Thanks Doug,
            Joey Ward

            PS..... Doug, next time you see Harold, could you tell him that Joey would like
            to see Him start posting on The Truth Seeker Bulletin Board. It sure would be grand of
            Harold to do so. Thanks again for your help.


            Seeker For The Last Time
            02/08/2004
            Top

            Another X`Eckist Story



            I joined Eckankar in the early 80's, attracted partly because of their concept
            of Soul Travel and left in the mid-90's. I had become a 3rd Initiate by that time. Because of
            my outspoken aggressive remarks and asking too many questions about concealed facts about the organization, many wondered why the LEM had allowed me to reach that level.

            Initiations and secret words and the idea that we need a Master, mean nothing to
            me in this life because in my different existences I was connected to many of these
            concepts. There were times I needed these secret words and initiations and a Master and
            for those who need them now, it is OK. It is something many have to experience, if not in
            this lifetime, in a different one.

            In the mid-80's, I posted a few remarks on ARE. This was a good lesson for me,
            because some of the die-hard ECKists attempted to attack me with their "sword from the
            Sugmad" and "weed me out of the garden of ECK." I had no grudge against them because I
            knew they would learn to open their minds. At the time, they believed in what they
            did and that it was the right thing for them to do. I accepted it.

            I hadn't been on ARE for a long time but a few weeks ago I was impelled to go on
            it and out popped the information concerning Ford Johnson's book. In the past,
            ECKist would say it was the ECK or LEM. I ordered the book, which I am enjoying now.
            It brought back some memories of Eckankar.

            I was very surprised to see some of the die-hard and long-standing
            ECKists, including High Initiates, especially Nathan. This was a shock and it takes a lot to shock me. I am very happy for Nathan because we had communicated in the past. Nathan would make a very high class lawyer in this life(have no idea what he does). Boy, did he
            swing that sword for Eckankar. He left nothing standing. But that was then and now is now.
            I am happy, Nathan that you allowed yourself to open and move beyond the garden of
            ECK. There is so much more to learn.

            To some Eckankar is still a beautiful garden and I can respect that. I would like to stress that I have nothing against Eckankar and similar religions. They may be needed
            for souls to grow.

            I enjoyed reading the comments on this board..and I'll be back when I have time.

            I'll sign off with the name I used to use on ARE - Seeker, for the last time.



            Doug Marman
            02/08/2004
            Top

            A Few Responses



            I've received a number of comments to my last post.

            I will respond to some of the questions and comments.

            To Degar:

            I agree with you that no church, book or religion can replace the part of us
            that knows. We also both agree on the importance of fearlessness in seeing
            truth, and the importance of teachings with heart.

            My lights are fine, as are yours.


            To Joey Ward:

            I don't do yes or no questions, but I will try to keep my answers short:

            1. Did Paul Twitchell have the highest state of consciousness as the Godman
            as he told the world through his writings?

            I don't know how anyone could say who was highest or who is even higher than
            another. So, I would never say such a thing, myself. I don't even think having the
            highest state of consciousness should be anyone's goal. A person can gain a high state of
            consciousness and be unable to make a living here in the physical. That's not very useful.

            2. Does Harold Klemp have the highest state of consciousness as the Godman
            as he is telling the world throught his writings?

            Same as above, however, I will add this. I agree with the Sufis who say that there is what they call The Pole of The World. The Sufi teacher Ibn al' Arabi points out that this same principle applies at every level of human affairs. Another Sufi put it this way: "Just as there is someone who acts as the pole for the whole of humanity, so there are poles for every faith, community, occupation - even down to the level of towns."

            We sense when we are near such people since they seem to represent and carry the
            whole of the town or company or faith that they are a part of. Every age has
            those who carry the whole of things for the world at every level. We connect to that
            whole through their vision.

            However, I don't believe in saying who the Pole of the World is, since everyone
            needs to find this out for themselves. In fact, in most times through history the Pole
            of The World was hidden. The Sufis say this as well.

            3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works?

            Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes.

            4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on
            them as if the Eck Master were saying them?

            Yes.

            5. Who do you Trust to tell the truth about Spiritual truths? Pick one only.
            [Names omitted]

            I see all teachings as mines. The good ones are gold mines, but they all need to be sorted through to find the pure gold. I have found no outer teachings that are pure gold.

            The only place to test the gold is within ourselves, when we try to use it in our lives.

            You might point to an outer person. I would rather point to our inner knowingness to recognize truth. We often do pick it up from others, however.


            To Journey:

            You asked: "If you are not trying to undermine Ford and his book "Confessions of
            a God Seeker," why did you give such a negative opinion about the book in The
            Chanhassen Villager last November?"

            If you read my comments to the Chanhassen Villager, just like in my last post, it is focused on the errors in what David Lane has reported and the unfortunate fact that Ford repeated these as if they were facts as David did. I am absolutely amazed at how far the distortion of truths from David Lane has spread. I was disappointed that the newspaper had not done better research, and that Ford had not as well, especially since David Lane himself suggested to Ford that he study my book more thoroughly to see what had been discussed via the Internet.

            I am just as amazed at how quickly and completely people assume that I am some
            kind of pawn in a battle or fighting some kind of war against Ford for pointing out
            the errors. I guess this goes to show how far off perceptions of someone else's motivations
            can be. People will imagine what my motivations are, but they are a million miles from
            the mark.

            I do agree that some people like to win their arguments no matter what, and since I have no interest in that, this is exactly why I have said I would say no more about such things unless folks here were interested. From the responses I've seen, there doesn't seem to be much interest in what I was writing about.

            I think you are right that we should all look at our motivations. I have certainly done so and have tried only to offer help in clearing up some of the confusions that have been going on for a while by getting to the facts. I have tried to stay far from criticizing anyone else's beliefs, although I do think some friendly dialogue in this area is good.

            I think it is just as important to look at the motivations for bringing up my personal motivations. I have not questioned Ford's motivations, nor would I. I think his intentions are sincere. Getting stuck over another person's so-called intentions is often the way our Censor stops us from seeing another person's point of view fairly.

            When we get so attached to our cause, anyone who says anything that appears to
            interfere with our cause becomes or enemy. The motivations of our enemies are always wrong in our minds. Ask them and they would say the same about their enemies.

            It is a sad fact that public dialogue over religious matters is almost impossible these days.
            This was not true in America during its early days. Public dialogue was often lively and contentious, but never came to people disowning their neighbors or rejecting their families and friends like it does today.

            As far as I am concerned, we are all friends here with a common interest in Spiritual Truth.
            That is how I see it. And we will each decide for ourselves what is true, as we should.


            To DD:

            You wrote: "You spend all of your time chipping away at the edges of the argument,
            finding miniscule points of contention (a minor date discrepancy here, a location there)
            but not once do you address the underlying core truth that is being and has been
            expressed here from the very beginning."

            Exactly right. So why is everyone getting so worked up about it? Why is no one
            simply acknowledging the minor points and letting it go? These are not core truths,
            just a matter of correcting errors in fact.

            No, I don't agree that my "can't we all get along" message doesn't help us get at the truth. In fact, let me say it this way: If we can not listen to those who see things differently than we do, then we will never see Truth. This doesn't mean we should all agree, but it certainly
            does mean that we should be able to hold respectful and friendly conversations
            with those who have a different way of seeing things. We should be open to learning from
            others.

            You wrote: "Your method is to find a few unimportant discrepancies and use them
            as an attempt to discredit the entire revelation of overall truth discovered."

            This is incorrect. I am only trying to point out the errors. I am not trying to discredit the entire message. But clearly, after we have seen the facts for what they are, the overall picture does change somewhat. That's natural.

            Since so many of David Lane's claims are in fact not based on facts at all, but merely
            on imagined intentions and speculations, I have also offered other possible interpretations.
            My point is not that David's guesses are wrong and mine are right, but simply to
            show how widely interpretations can vary when there are no facts.

            You are the one who is painting a picture of black and white, not I. I don't see David
            or Ford as all wrong, nor as all right. I say let's find the gold wherever we look.
            Why blame anyone for the fact that everything they offer is not pure gold?

            Lastly, you suggest that I am defending a teaching and that I am an apologist.
            Okay, perhaps I am. I don't feel that is what I am doing, but I can see it would
            look that way to you. But surely you see that your comments are the same. You are
            also defending your beliefs. In fact, everyone who has responded to my post on this
            bulletin board has picked at what I would call minor, technical details and
            completely avoided my points. This doesn't mean you or anyone else here is any less
            sincere, does it?


            To Nacal:

            You asked: "Where do you ever give a reference or a quote from your sources?"

            They are in my book, and have been thoroughly discussed on alt.religion.eckankar
            and can be found in the records there. I would be glad to present them here as
            well, if anyone was interested.

            You asked: "Why have you returned without answering the questions posed to you
            by site members in previous postings? When did Twitchell first write about the
            mahanta?

            Was it 1969 as one site member has stated?"

            I answered last time that I had just moved to a new home and my files were still
            packed in boxes. They are still packed in boxes, but a few are handy so I pulled out
            Paul's old Wisdom Notes and Illuminated Way Letters.

            You seem to be right. Paul didn't use the word, Mahanta, until the January 1969
            Illuminated Way Letter and the February 1969 Wisdom Note. Before then he mainly used, The
            Master, Spiritual Traveler, Teacher, etc. Not even the mention of Living ECK
            Master very often, although Outer Master and living Master were mentioned often.

            This is interesting. Thanks for pointing it out.

            You wrote: "You are also being untruthful when you say that you, "… have no
            desire to interfere with the beliefs of anyone."

            And how would you know that? You seem to know my own desires and intentions
            better than I do. Clearly I will need to ask you next time what my intentions
            and desires are.

            This is foolishness. Do you realize how hard it is to know the desires of your
            own children?

            How often do parents misunderstand what their children are trying to do? Have
            you never had this happen to you when you were a child? Yet you think you can
            actually guess my desires, when you don't even know me? Have we even met?

            Why do people spend so much time imagining they KNOW the intentions of those
            they disagree with?

            I see this with ECKists just as often as with David Lane and the group here. So,
            I'm not picking on this group. I see it as a real trap and an excuse to justify
            rejecting what another person has to say.

            You wrote: "You also claim to "have enjoyed the conversations on this bulletin
            board" and yet you only respond to selective questions."

            That's right. That was what I came here to share, after Ford claimed that I was
            not after the kind of truth that could be discussed openly and that my book was
            not about encouraging open dialogue. I came here for just that kind of dialogue,
            but guess what? No one here wants to discuss the facts or the errors openly.

            If I were Ford, I would care enough to make sure the facts I was using were
            accurate. I thought, especially as a lawyer, he would want to know.

            You wrote: "You attempt to confuse (like Paul and Harold) by twisting and
            abusing truth in order to blind the reader with your distortions and illusions of reality."

            If you really believe this, then why not point out a quote where you feel this
            is what I am attempting to do, rather than making broad accusations about my
            motivations? Why not just address directly what what I am saying and point out
            how you see it differently? I have no intention of twisting the truth in anyway
            at all.

            You wrote: "Is what Harold's teaches (Eckankar) a myth?

            "Since I brought the subject up can you tell me if the Holocaust was a myth or
            not?

            "Some things ARE black and white so just give a yes or no answer to the
            previously mentioned two questions. Please, no long-winded explanation, yes or
            no to each question."

            Sorry, I don't do yes or no answers, but I'll be glad to discuss your questions.
            Yes, I would say a lot of what is taught about Eckankar is a myth. Yes, I think
            a lot of what people think about the Holocaust is made up of myth as well. This
            doesn't mean that the Holocaust didn't happen, or that many of the stories or
            facts are lies. It just means that people often try to simplify things.

            History is largely made up of myth. There are a million personal individual
            stories about World War II, for example, yet the history books treat it as one
            thing that happened. The people who go through it don't see it the way the
            history books do. They were there, but the myths are what we can deal with to
            understand. Otherwise it is too complex.

            You wrote: "Doug, instead of focusing on David Lane or Ford's book let's now
            focus on the writings of Twitchell and Klemp and see where we can find
            inaccuracies, or is the world still flat to you? Did you like the posting from
            the May-June-July 1971 Mystic World about Twitchell? "No one really knows for
            sure where he came from, when he was born, or if his true name is even Paul
            Twitchell. How long he has been on this Earth planet is not known." Or, how
            about this quote from the same article, "Paul is known to the world as Peddar
            Zaskq, which is his real name, is an occidental." Wasn't this also his name for
            his last incarnation and his spiritual name?"

            Obviously we now know where he came from and was born (Paducah, Kentucky) and
            that his true name was not Paul Twitchell, but was John Paul Twitchell. We also
            now know when he was born (1909). Paul certainly didn't ever talk about these
            things, nor would he answer questions about them directly, and I think he liked
            the idea that his past was mysterious, and he helped to create this mysterious
            past. Yes, Paul is only known to the world as Peddar Zaskq because he told the
            world that was his spiritual name.

            And yes, this is the kind of writing that is mythological. Did you think I would
            say something else?

            You went on: "Let's now go back up to the preceding paragraph since you seem to
            claim to like "facts" (why don't you give your sources?). "But it is a fact that
            his Master Rebazar Tarzs, an ancient Tibetan lama, who appears to be in his
            early forties, was a young man when Columbus discovered America." Now, was that
            really a "fact," or a delusional belief, or a deliberate lie? Or, is it that,
            "There is a need of the people to believe in the magic of a saviour, and Sri
            Paul Twitchell knows this and acts out the part" (same article)."

            It certainly is no fact, since there are no records nor anything else to prove
            that Rebazar Tarzs even exists, never mind how old he really is. However, there
            is no proof that it is a lie, either. It certainly sounds far-fetched. But I
            don't think the belief in saints, saviors and spiritual teachers comes from the
            desire to believe in magic. I think it comes from the innate memory within Soul
            that there is a truth and meaning to life that most of the world seems to have
            forgotten, but some remember.

            As Rumi once said, the reason that false gold is so popular is because there is
            such a thing as real gold.

            Of course, mixed with this is that many people want a father figure, or want
            someone to take care of them and tell them what is right and wrong.

            You wrote: "The sad thing is that there is no freedom in religion… there is only
            control through the use of fear and surrender of the common sense of having an
            open mind, and of course, the dangled carrot of initiation and hope."

            It certainly seems that way. To me, without freedom there is no point to a
            spiritual teaching. It is simply a social group. There is more peer pressure and
            more influence from the people who want everyone to be harmonious rather than
            speaking honestly, than control from above, but in general I agree with you.

            You wrote: "Paul states, "Ramaji was one of the first initiates in the ancient
            Order of the Vairagi." It seems Paul has a problem spelling his name. "Ji" is a
            Hindu suffix used to denote respect and affection. But, Paul is not speaking of
            Rama."

            Why do you think that Paul is referring to someone different than Rama? The
            Hindus often add the "ji" to the end of a name, and sometimes it is written with
            only the "j". Take the name Shamus-i-Tabriz. Generally this is spelled, Shams of
            Tabriz. Same person. Jalalludin Rumi is spelled dozens of ways. Sometimes he is
            also called Mevlana. Same person. Sometimes it is written Shabda Yoga, sometimes
            Shabd Yog. Sometimes Yoga is spelled Joga. I interpret this quote from Paul to
            be referring to the same person as Rama, but if you feel otherwise I would find
            it interesting to hear why.

            You asked: "By the way, why has Harold evaded giving his birth date and age?"

            I don't know. Probably because it is a personal fact that has nothing to do with
            his role. But maybe it is just a hold-over from Paul. You would have to ask him.
            My guess is that he doesn't want people holding birthday parties because of his
            birthdate.

            You wrote: "Also, why is it Doug that on page 282 that Harold, the mahanta,
            doesn't even know today about an experience he had in1970. He states, "Was he
            really an ECK Master? Who can say?" Shouldn't the Master who is greater than the
            God of all religions know such things?"

            I would have to read the whole quote in context. It sounds to me as if Harold is
            asking a rhetorical question. In other words, who can say if he was a Master
            then?

            Actually the question I ask is how did Darwin know that he was the Mahanta, or
            how does Harold know this? Isn't this like any initiate who might think they
            have gained the next initiation? Isn't this the same question? How do they
            really know?

            You ask: "Are the initiations in Eckankar valid as a means to greater spiritual
            growth over those who are non-eckists? Or, is this a myth too?"

            I think the initiations are a mixed bag. There is definitely reality to them,
            from my personal experience. But they have become filled with myths as well. I
            can tell you that real Self-Realization is rare, HI or not. The initiation level
            doesn't prove anything. It is more meaningful as a personal matter than a
            comparison to others. I don't think anyone should be judging another person's
            worth or truth by what initiation level they are at. Including the Master.

            You asked: "Paul states on page 136 of Difficulties Of Becoming The Living ECK
            Master, "Cause with all of that, see, I write books in series. I have four books
            that are finished now; well, the Shariyat is a continued writing, but I've got
            three books actually." So Doug, where's book three? If it wasn't finished why
            didn't Harold go to the Astral Library to finish it?"

            Paul wrote a number of the first chapters to book three. I think he got to chapter three or four. That's as far as it has gotten. I think that Harold thought about completing book three but for some reason decided it wasn't his place to do so. I would be surprised if Harold ever finishes book three, or tries to. But you would have to ask him if you wanted to know.

            You wrote: "Was the "Moon Virus" that Twitchell warned of a myth or a self-promotional lie, or did he make an erroneous assumption or was it just conjecture (page 234 of "Difficulties")? Show me where Kirpal Singh's name is used with Sudar Singh's?"

            I have no idea where Paul got the idea of the Moon Virus from. He certainly used
            it to gain some news. It is similar in some ways to the HIV virus in the way it
            has stumped the scientists, but I have heard no connection to the moon.

            Here is the first quote of Paul's where he mentions Sudar Singh, from the
            January 1964 Orion magazine:

            "I began my study of bilocation under the tutelage of Satguru Sudar Singh, in
            Allahabad, India. Later, I switched to Sri Kirpal Singh of old Delhi. Both
            were teaching the Shabda Yoga, that which is called the Yoga of Sound Current. I
            had to learn to leave my body at will and return, without effort..."


            Here is another quote from my book:

            "I have since found two other early articles of Paul's, that show the same
            thing: An article that ran in early 1966 called, Can You Be In Two Places At The
            Same Time?, shows Sudar Singh, from Allahabad, India, along with Bernard of
            England, a Self-Realization Swami who has a retreat in Maryland, Kirpal Singh of
            Delhi, India, and Rebazar Tarzs, a Tibetan monk.



            "The second article was called, The God Eaters, and ran in the November 1964
            issue of The Psychic Observer. In the article Paul talks about Rebazar Tarzu
            [sic], who he "made contact with...through bilocation," and Kirpal Singh as his
            teachers. These examples clearly show that both Sudar Singh and Rebazar Tarzs
            were referred to, side by side with Kirpal Singh. It was not until late 1966
            before Paul suddenly stopped referring to Kirpal Singh."



            You wrote: "You mention that you talked to Patti Simpson and basically she says
            it was "funny" how Paul would evade giving out information on himself. You wrote
            that Paul tried to leave information blank "when it came to filling out official
            forms," but found that, "they would gladly accept whatever he wrote whether it
            was right or wrong." In truth, Paul intentionally lied and mislead people.
            Ironically, this is one "fact" that you have supplied to help prove the validity
            of David Lane's claim! This is also proof that you don't even listen to your own
            words! Perhaps, this is because your conscious subjective (self) is to evade,
            and your unconscious objective Self (God-Soul) is to impart truth."


            If you want to imagine that, go ahead. I think there is a big difference between
            someone who is intentionally trying to mislead people about their age, and a
            person who refuses to give out their age. But if you want to say that both are
            technically lies, that's fine with me. It seems to me that you are just trying
            to make it look like something it isn't.

            Remember, the picture that David painted is that Paul lied to Gail about his
            age, as he had lied about his age his whole life. In fact, Gail knew perfectly
            well that Paul wasn't giving out his age, and so did everyone else. Pretty
            different picture if you ask me.

            Here's a similar example. David was accused of copyright infringment many years
            ago (ironic, isn't it?). It was over a book written about J R Hinkins group.
            Under oath he said one thing. In his deposition, also under oath, he said the
            opposite. The judge politely said that his testimony was untrustworthy. David
            claims that he was not trying to lie, he just didn't remember it correctly.
            However, the testimony shows that the first story he told seemed like the one
            that would best help his case. Later it turned out to be exactly the wrong
            thing, so when asked the same question in court, he answered the opposite way.
            He lost his case over this.

            Would you call that lying? David doesn't. I'll take David's word for it that he
            just forgot, even though it looks otherwise. I guess that's just how I am.

            You wrote: "Doug you have imagined facts through your own distorted belief
            system of myth being reality. You seem to be confused as you spread confusion to
            others (somewhat like Typhoid Mary).You have no idea of what fact or truth is
            because you are unable to hear truth."

            Mighty big claims. Why not just show me the quotes where you think I'm off base
            and share how you see it? Why imagine that I am unable to see truth?

            I'm sure I see it differently than you do. But I have few illusions about Paul.
            My point was to show how many illusions that David had, while claiming
            otherwise. Ford's book has got them now, too, since he was taken in by David's
            story. The irony is that those who are most concerned about pointing out the
            lies and illusions of others are often just as unwilling to admit and correct
            their own.

            However, if you feel that I've made any errors, please point them out. David
            caught a few, and I immediately corrected them. I would like to make my book as
            accurate as possible, and I'm in the process of making another edit to include
            the latest information, since we are always learning new things.

            Thanks for asking specific questions. More of this would make a real dialogue worthwhile. And I am glad to share the specific evidence behind my comments if anyone is
            interested.

            Doug.



            Degar
            02/08/2004
            Top

            Be The Now!!



            If you are a follower of the Clear Light and Silent Sound, then you follow the
            natural order of who you really are as Beingness. The secret between the truth
            and the lie, is intention. Intention is the prime mover of awareness. How many
            really see themselves as the observer and the observed, the now, the present.
            Look only to the temple within yourself, no church, building or outer temple
            will ever point the way. In fact remove or demolish all these objects of glory,
            pride and self righteousness for in the heart of the now resides the gift.
            "Remind all those that show you the way to the false temple of mortar and brick
            that you have out grown their cage and See now with the Spiritual eye only
            Truth."

            NO RELIGION can hold GOD to a given doctrine! Even the doctrine of Light and
            Sound…..

            Freedom can not be bound and Freedom will destroy all that try to hold it.

            Man is a funny creature, he seeks the company of the one and only primal cause
            even until death. He is even willing to kill to be near to it. He believes that
            distance exists between himself and his Maker and he must make a journey back to
            the Godhead. Knock, knock, is anyone home? Soul exists because it is GOD. God
            has never posed the question, "I love Soul". Your Higher Self JUST IS, no more
            - no less.

            Wake up!

            Dance, Sing and Be.

            "All thing must pass away" – George Harrison

            Hold on to the social consciousness if you must but as Ford and Gram are saying
            they only opened the door you must walk through and see Freedom for yourself. Not their
            truth, but yours.

            After the Temple of Eck was built, I made a number of visits to it. On one of my
            visits I noticed that the temples main entrance floor was cracked right down the
            middle. Eckankar had it repaired, so no one had any idea what had happened. If
            that had occurred in my life, I would have asked what Spirit was saying to me?
            Well I did….. What it told me was that the office(ORG) and the temple
            side(Spiritual) had a major division between them. Another way of seeing it was
            that the true teachings of Eck were no longer within the organization.

            Fear is the last thing to go…… Pure awareness of consciousness can only be
            experienced without fear.

            The events unfolding before us have the blessing of the Holy Order of the World
            Adepts or it would not be.

            This is not an end to something, but more of a beginning.

            Degar *




            Kermit
            02/08/2004
            Top

            Solipsist Reprieve: My Story -- Why I Left Eckankar



            Soul, if It exists, could have entered into the agreement to share the Eckankar
            dream. The purpose may have been for spiritual experience: to advance
            spiritually and learn to be of service in a better and higher way and to
            consciously learn a few other things, like the nature of illusion and deception.
            But if I believe that soul exists, then I am asking for another round of belief
            lessons. I had spiritual experiences, but how do I know that they are real now?
            All I know is that I am here now and even those two adverbs are suspect.

            Now it is the age of Aquarius and the Piscean age is over. Some astrologers say
            that the religions of the intercessor between man and God were an aspect of the
            Piscean phase. It is a strong aspect of the Aquarian age that the veils of the
            intercessors be lifted. And it implies a dark night for the wizard who commands
            his followers to "ignore that man behind the curtain." It is a bright day for
            expose' writers. Since reading the book, I have seen other works that expose
            Christianity and Judaism. All the political books are pointing out lies told by
            the governments and the other party and the history books. For the Christians
            out there: your version of "Confessions" may be the works of Timothy Freke and
            Peter Gandy. Lies and damn lies. All religions are of the cloth of deception,
            regardless of whose face is on the master.

            So it appears that Eckankar has decided to maintain its position as a spiritual
            middle school. We all saw this coming, felt it in many ways and Ford
            articulated it for our minds in a way that we could no longer ignore. We knew
            about David Lane and some of the plagiarism years ago and chose to forgive it.
            We wondered why Rebazar couldn't appear for a TV spot, if he was so physical.
            We were uncomfortable about Darwin being written out of history. The
            restrictive guidelines.

            When I went to receive my fifth initiation, the internal phrase kept repeating:
            "The bloom is off the rose. . . the bloom is off the rose." I wondered what
            that meant, but the meaning is emerging. The days of believing in Santa Clause
            are past. Time to take the next step in becoming emancipated. Joseph Campbell
            said that his studies gave him an overview of the myths and religions that
            precluded his having any spiritual experiences himself. It is like the old
            saying that he who carved the Buddha cannot worship it.

            But I had just finished the book and was casting about and asked spirit if it
            was true. The image of an animated Rebazar peered headfirst into my inner
            vision and then started to mirror every movement I made. I had never had an
            experience with him, but the message was that I was doing it and so I might as
            well quit struggling against the curriculum. "No more Mother Goose stories for
            you and you can pretty much forget about the tooth fairy," it told me.

            Now I suspect why Harold is always telling fairy tales. I see an image now of
            Paul laughing, after telling his audience that only a handful of them would
            understand what he was trying to say. What if he was trying to say that only
            deception exists in the world of illusion? Is Harold hinting that the teachings
            are a fairy tale used to teach a different lesson?

            Masters and lying liars do not come clean. But there may be more to this
            learning than is apparent. What if Harold had told us that he had discovered
            the truth about the whole sham and just said,

            "Well, you can call me Harold or you can call me Gerald, but you doesn't have to
            call me Sri anymore." Would that have been masterful? I do not know, but he
            didn't say that. He built a temple instead.

            One of the wake-up calls for me was an Ask-the-Master session for RESAs in one
            of the recent books. Those guys didn't know anything. They were asking
            questions and Harold was describing worlds and temples and I would like to think
            that RESAs should have been able to access that information themselves, if the
            path was working.

            But no mastership is happening here. With Eckankar producing only two and a
            half masters in almost 38 years, I was starting to worry that I wasn't on the
            short list, anyway. We're all better than we were and we are better public
            speakers, but that is not what we came for.

            We came onto the path because it promised mastership/enlightenment. One of the
            unspoken truths is that we don't have a chance of reaching it by way of
            Eckankar. It has been boiling us like frogs: slowly. By the time we have been
            around long enough to know that no one is going to go beyond the 8th initiation,
            except one guy, our minds are no longer independent enough to get that this path
            to mastership is not working and it not going to work.

            Now we have talked ourselves out of a way of life. Harold would probably say we
            have talked ourselves into a Dark Night of Soul. But that's the kind of beating
            we would be in for if we stayed around.

            I took a class with a lot of law enforcement types at one time. They said that
            everyone, except the most committed sociopath, has a need to tell the truth.
            The body language, tonal patterns and eye movements combine with other
            unconscious clues to betray a lie or a concealed truth. One way to conceal and
            deceive is to tell nothing but lies like Kevin Spacey's character in "The Usual
            Suspects." This may be how Paul Twitchell did it. There is a book about this
            subject called "Telling Lies" by Paul Ekman. It has been staring at me from my
            bookshelf for years and it has gradually dawned on me that the title and author
            may contain a hint.

            My inner voice says that there is only the one I Am that smears itself across
            the living tapestry and reabsorbs itself after one lifetime or many. So this
            baby is going out with the bath water.

            Thanks for tipping the scales.

            Kermit



            Journey
            02/07/2004
            Top

            Reply to GPk: On Unloving Attitudes



            Dear GPk,

            As to your unloving and lack of understanding attitude, I based that on what you
            said, especially in regards to your unkind words to Usually Skeptical.
            You also seem to be putting down people who are posting here on this message
            board. You continue to direct negative comments to others on this site. You come
            across as a very angry person so I am not surprised that my comments bothered
            you so much. You confused me because you sound like you are still an Eckist in
            your attacks.

            You are wrong in assuming I'm stuck/holding on to the teachings of Eckankar. I
            was not a member that long, but I read all of Harold's transcripts and several
            other books, attended Satsang classes, etc. From the get-go, it seemed like a
            lot of double talk and confusing--lots of contradictions. Your postings also
            attack Ford in that you said he was going to become the leader of a new
            religion, that would be no different from any other group. I think you are the
            one hung up on Eckankar. I am glad you are reading Ford's book. Then, I think
            your comments here would be made with a better perspective, regardless of your
            take on Ford's writings.

            It is obvious that the only self awareness that you have ever achieved has been
            of the little self. You seem to be still experiencing the brain washing of
            Eckankar. The comments that you have made indicate that you are only aware of
            the little self, rather than the higher self. Your initiation did not give you
            self-realization. This is the flaw I see in your reasoning. But this is all
            understandable because of the length of time you spent in the Eckankar
            organization--you have more to dump than I do. There is a massive amount of
            flawed concepts along with certain truths that have been mixed to such a degree
            that it is almost impossible to decipher it all. In addition to anger, there is
            fear that there is no truth out there--that you will not be able to find it.
            This is, perhaps, the root of your negativity that you have lashed out on this
            site. This is my understanding.

            Also, I have not touted the degree of my spirituality as you have. I am only a
            Truth Seeker.

            Best regards and good reading,
            Journey



            Willy
            02/07/2004
            Top

            FS Response To Ecki99 Plus 2 Laws



            Thanks for the thorough response to the questions raised by Ecki99 and others.
            As one other book (Christian Bible) often quoted notes "by their fruits ye shall
            know them". Why do so many Eckists see the activities of HCS and former
            members of Eckankar as a threat? There are no lawsuits filed, there are no
            media exposes, there is just the statement of spiritual truths as experienced by
            those who have taken the next step. There is no massive attempt to force Eck
            chelas to leave their path, if that is where they are comfortable. To each his
            own.

            Harold has made much of Richard Maybury's two laws namely:

            1. Do all you say you will do. (Your word is your bond, honor it.)
            2. Do not encroach on others or their property. (Respect the integrity of
            others.)

            I really like these two laws, since they contain so much of spiritual truth in
            so few words. And this world would surely be a much better place if they were
            practiced by more people as individuals, by nations, and by spiritual paths.
            Perhaps the organization of Eckankar and its leaders should consider how well
            they are honoring these two laws, especially in regard to former members and
            also in regard to current members.




            FS
            02/07/2004
            Top

            Response to Eckie_99: The Real Impact of Eckankar Mythology and The Role of HCS




            Dear eckie_99

            I may be starting to look predictable with the way I present my views to this
            website, but, as many of the questions put to this site are in defence of
            eckankar mythology, then one way of replying to these questions is to use the
            very mythology that is being defended in order to express the truer side of
            eckankar, the side the mahanta does not want to be seen. This reply therefore
            will be no exception. I feel sure that this will meet with your approval.,
            seeing as I am using the constructed, contrived, compilations of the master
            compiler, one Paul Twitchell.

            I quote your own words:

            b. A Person who builds a framework that can help people grow spiritually, and
            shows it to the world, to be judged on its own merits.

            There is one point that you have failed to address in your defence of eckankar
            being a framework that can help people grow, and that is, `The growth of people
            spiritually within the framework of eckankar is dependant on Harold's acceptance
            as to what he sees as spiritual growth, or more accurately stated, what he is
            prepared to accept as `Truth.' I will therefore show to the world, and to you,
            another side of how this framework of eckankar really operates in helping the
            individual grow spiritually, and let the world judge it on its own merits.
            Firstly, let the world see some of the teachings of eckankar that will be
            relevant to this reply.

            ME: This is a false premise.
            Klemp plays the role of a
            hypnotist and magician.
            Any "spiritual growth" is
            made by the individual
            and despite Klemp's
            interference via codependency.

            Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
            "Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and the tests
            given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears. Every Spiritual
            Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela to call upon the Master.
            If the vision fails to reply then it is false".

            Shariyat, book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
            "Be on guard, lest he who seeks without the Vi-Guru finds those who only appear
            as the Holy One, claiming to be angels, or saints. Let none deceive the chela.
            If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he cannot be deceived by the kal
            Niranjan. If he has not the armour of Spirit, he can be misled".

            Shariyat, book 1, page 149. Third Printing 1972:
            "The ECKist knows that the presence of the Living ECK Master is always with
            him. He is never alone".

            What is presented here to the world, and yourself , is the truth of my own
            experience while within this framework of eckankar and its leader, the mahanta.
            Here is part of my letter to Harold Klemp in regards to my journal of recorded
            inner experiences that was sent to him while following this framework of
            eckankar, that you say, " can help people grow spiritually",

            "All that is contained within the journal has withstood the tests of the secret words that are required to be used to prove their validity and all that you are about to read, I stand by as true."

            Now friend, let the world see what the teachings of eckankar say about the inner
            experiences of a chela and how they are viewed within this framework.

            "The Shariyat book 2, pages 50-51: Second Edition 1988:
            "No ECK Master will acknowledge his appearance to another person. This is
            neither modesty nor is it a feeling of hiding something; in a sense he is
            letting the individual decide for themselves whether it was really him. He
            wants them to decide if it was reality. In this way he is not telling, nor
            confirming his presence with them in the Atma Sarup, but allowing them the
            independence of knowing and understanding whether it was actually him.

            If a person makes up his mind that the living ECK Master really appeared to him,
            then he knows it and this cannot be taken away from him, regardless. However,
            if he has to be told that it was the ECK Master, then he is always in doubt, for
            it was an outside source which gave him his information and not himself. It is
            superficial knowledge and not from his own inner source.

            He must always remember that the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master is not the one
            to tell him of his inner experiences, nor whether the ECK Master has appeared to
            him. But he must know this with a faith that is beyond anything that he has
            experienced and, therefore, it will stay with him. Otherwise it may fade in
            time, and the experiencer soon forgets whether it was really the ECK Master".

            Now let the world see the reply from the leader of this framework of eckankar
            that helps the individual to grow spiritually.

            Reply from Harold Klemp in regards to my journal of inner experiences while a
            chela under his claimed protection as the mahanta.

            "In response to your letter and journal of inner experiences which led you to
            think you have received the Rod of Eck Power. You have not.

            Your instincts were right not to believe this. The Kal misled you."

            Let it be explained to the world, and your own good self, that there was never
            any claim made to me having had received the rod of eck power, only that it was
            a possibility. Therefore, before we go any further, Harold Klemp is wrong in
            his statement. Now we must look at his other words, those of `The Kal Misled
            You`. Now friend, after being told I was misled by the kal, even though I have
            Harold's assurance that, `If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he cannot be
            deceived by the KAL Niranjan.`. he then fails to explain how this could have
            happened and failed to give any further guidance as to what I could do to
            prevent it happening again, although as we can see by the promise of this
            framework, I should never have been misled in the first place.

            Having now told me I was mistaken, Harold then goes on to lay the karmic
            responsibility upon me for being responsible for leading others off the path of
            eck.

            "This happens more often than one would care to believe. People who fall for
            this trick and mislead others off the path of eck become responsible for the karma."

            Let the world and yourself take note of these words, for we are told something
            very interesting here; "This happens more often than one would care to believe."
            Are not these words very thought provoking? Is Harold admitting that being
            misled by the kal while within this framework of eckankar,and, having his
            protection of the Vi-Guru, being misled by the kal is a common occurance? If
            this is so, then the claimed protection of the vi-guru must be failing to work.
            Not only that, the secret words must also be failing. Let the world see what
            eckankar has to say about the protection of its secret words:

            Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
            "Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and the tests
            given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears. Every Spiritual
            Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela to call upon the Master.
            If the vision fails to reply then it is false".

            Let it go on record that the visions within the journal's inner experiences did
            reply and that I used the Word, and Words as is asked of the chela. Some of
            these words being Sugmad, Wah Z, HU, Mahanta, or any of the names of the masters
            of the vairagi.

            Here I think we should let the world know just how important this figure of the
            mahanta, the vi-guru really is, otherwise they may not fully realise just how
            powerful the mahanta truly is?

            Shariyat book 2 page 196. Second Edition 1988:
            "The eck works are the most powerful in this world; and the mahanta, the living
            eck master, who is the vehicle and channel for the eck, is the most powerful
            being within the physical world, as well as the planets and all the planes
            within the worlds of God."

            Shariyat, book 1 says on page 81. Third Printing 1972:
            "He is stronger than any man in intellect or spirit, for he has unlimited
            power, and yet this strength is combined with the noble virtues of the humble
            and gentle. All people find in him inspiration for the development of noble
            character".

            Shariyat, book 2 page 184 Second Edition 1988:
            "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master has other titles. He is the Godman, the
            Vi-Guru, the Light Giver, protector of the poor, the king of heaven, saviour of
            mankind, the scourge of evil, and the defender of the faithful. He is the real
            and only power in all the universes of God. No one can harm him without his
            consent, for all that is done to him is given permission by the ECK, with his
            consent".

            To help further my spiritual growth within this framework of eckankar, the
            mahanta now goes on to say:

            "As a spiritual discipline you are put back to the First Circle of initiation
            and are to stand aside from all eck duties for the present."

            We can show the world that this is also against what the framework of eckankar
            teaches:

            Dialogues With The Master page 172:
            First Printing 1990 "Remember this that those who demand respect and love of
            others to themselves are only exercising the negative or attracting power. The
            true teachings do not discipline in any way; do not set up duties or
            difficulties or tasks for teaching their disciples."

            This framework also tells the world, and its followers, that the teacher will
            bring about any changes needed within a chela without any pain or difficulties.


            Illuminated Way Letters 1966-1971 page 54 Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell
            Gross:

            "It is doubtful that the teacher will sit with his chela and discuss any
            character faults of the aspirant. Hardly ever will the teachers tell anyone
            what is wrong with himself, but he will concentrate on the error and bring about
            the change from the inner to the outer world, without pain or difficulty to the
            chelas, very often without the chela having any conscious awareness of it."

            Dear friend, and the world. I am fully aware of what this framework of eckankar
            has done to me, I am also fully aware of what this framework has done to many
            others, and this is the reason why the framework of the H.C.S. was brought
            about. It was brought about to help those who have suffered the injustice of
            eckankar at the hands of its mythological mahanta and to give them support and
            a free voice.

            We can now look to another aspect of this frameworks teachings, if not its
            practice, that of calling upon the master when the chela finds themselves in any
            difficulty:

            I was now left with no other recourse to attain further guidance other than to
            write to the mahanta at the physical level. As yet, nothing has been given. Now
            for the eckankar apologists they can say, "Get It On The Inner", but, and this
            is very very very important, how can the individual `Get It On The Inner` when
            the mahanta has just told the individual that all they have received on the
            inner is the misleadings of the kal? That the chela has the right to call upon
            the mahanta is given in the frameworks teachings. Not only has the chela the
            right to call upon the mahanta, but the mahanta is bound by his duty to answer
            each and every call of this nature. Let the world see the following exhibit:


            Illuminated Way Letters, 1966-1971, PAGE 130 Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell
            Gross:

            "Whenever the chela experiences any difficulty with himself such as
            falling into the negative trap, or even with Soul Travel, he should call upon
            the Master to assist him, or conduct him as the soul traveller to the spiritual
            worlds. For the Living ECK Master is bound by his mission to answer each and
            every call of this nature".


            Let it go on record, that the mahanta has failed in his duty, both to give the
            inner protection that his framework promises to give, and that he has also
            failed to assist a chela when called upon to do so. Now the world can see what
            the framework of eckankar says about a master failing in his duty:

            Shariyat, book 2, page 219. Second Edition 1988:
            "If he falters or fails; it is possible that he may be taken out of this
            position; and if he falters in his responsibility while serving as the Mahanta,
            the Living ECK Master, it is possible that he must step down for another to take
            his place".

            Unlike the mahanta, I am prepared to let all see the contents of my journal and
            come to their own understanding, and, unlike the mahanta, I am prepared to
            answer any questions that others may wish to ask. The framework of the H.C.S.
            has provided this facility for openness and free speech, the framework of
            eckankar has provided only threats to those who voice dissension and doubt.

            Shariyat, book 1, page 91. Third Printing 1972:
            "To ridicule, to scorn, to speak mockingly of the word of the Mahanta, and not
            to have faith in him and the cause of ECK is to bring woes on the advocator of
            doubt. It brings his karmic progress to a halt, increases his incarnations in
            this world, and causes him to suffer untold hardships".

            Even if a chela, or chela's tries to broach a question that is not wanted by the framework of eckankar and its leader, its teachings provide a guidance for the party faithful of how to view this dissesion within the ranks.

            Shariyat, book 2, pages 25-26. Second Edition 1988:
            " It must be remembered that all complaints and all arguments against the ECK,
            which are directed at the Mahanta, are the works of the Kal. Such assaults on
            the Mahanta are those which originate from the Kal using the minds and
            consciousness of those persons within its power to destroy the Mahanta and the
            ECK, if at all possible. These are the works of the Kal, who uses religion,
            ministers, and lay persons to bring about the downfall of the ECK, because it is
            the truth. There will be those who call themselves ECK Masters and disguise
            themselves under the robes of the ECK, but they are prophets with false faces
            who are lying to the ECKist`s , but few if any who are true followers of the ECK
            are ever deceived by these agents of the Kal".

            What Harold Klemp and the eckankar organisation have chosen to ignore is that
            truth, a truth that can be proven, is not an assault upon the mahanta, it is an
            assault upon that which is untrue. If Harold Klemp as the mahanta and the
            eckankar organisation see, and feel, that this as an assault upon them, then it
            can only be because they have something to hide. Truth knows no fear, so why
            does the framework of eckankar hide behind a wall of silence, instead of making
            a stand upon its proclaimed truth in order to defend the truth of the sugmad and
            its faithful followers?

            Let those who have the eyes to see and the ears to ear reach their own verdict
            from the `Facts` provided by the framework of eckankar itself , and its
            application of its teachings by the mahanta. `By Their Actions Ye Shall Know
            Them`

            Dear friend, and the world, I rest my case.



            Usually Skeptical
            02/07/2004
            Top

            Response to eckie_99: I Took Your Test and Got An "A" !



            Dear ekie,

            Well, I looked at your test questions and have the answers... !.)

            1.)
            Q- What is more ethically incorrect?
            A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold

            2.)
            Q- Who is less truthful?
            A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold (that was just like #1!)

            3.)
            Q- Who is spiritually more developed?
            A- "C" Those who are not afraid to see and hear truth

            4.)
            Q- What is a bigger spiritual crime?
            A- "C" Not to give people the opportunity to know and choose truth over lies

            That wasn't so hard after all... was it!

            I graded it myself and got 100% correct!

            Usually Skeptical

            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that
            rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"
            >
            > Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original links/threads for
            complete context.)
            >
            > To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is still a
            long post though.
            >
            > (1)
            >
            > Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online book:
            >
            > [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my
            self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day I [Doug
            Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in the box. It was a
            personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his home. It sounded like Paul
            was experimenting again. This time he was trying to create an audio version of
            something like Dialogues With The Master.
            >
            > The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs.
            Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely sound, saying something
            like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicking the voice of Rebazar
            Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic.
            This was so long ago I can't remember much more than that, but the tape was
            amazing to me, and I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it
            today.
            >
            > So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had ever heard
            anything about it before. He immediately became interested, told me that it was
            news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I told Darwin that I had left
            it in my apartment with all the other tapes I was sorting through, but I would
            run home to get it for him. I immediately jumped up to head for my car.
            >
            > It was at this point that Darwin said something that left me with a deep
            impression. He saw that I was hurrying toward my car in my desire to get the
            tape for him, and he said, "Take your time." He then paused, as if he was saying
            something very important, and he added, "There is never any reason to rush."
            [... .]
            >
            > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Nine.htm
            >
            > (2)
            >
            > July 2001:
            >
            > "The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT my
            invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David Lane?]
            >
            > Kirpal "thought" Twitchell was denying it. How interesting. Why doesn't
            David show us the rest of the quote, which explains why Kirpal thought that?
            Kirpal makes it very clear that he is referring to The Tiger's Fang, which in
            its first draft mentioned Kirpal as Paul's teacher, but was changed to Rebazar
            Tarzs by the time it was published in 1967. [....]" - [Doug Marman?]
            >
            > http://tinyurl.com/4x3kl25
            >
            > (3)
            >
            > July 2003:
            >
            > Interesting, Doug. I have mixed feeling about the "plagerism". For thos most
            part, I see the copied info as generally either common themes or insignificant
            fillers. However, I find the quotes where he claimed to have come from Rebazar
            to have been done in really poor taste... and perhaps not a great move in his
            part ???
            >
            What are your on that stuff ?

            > I agree with you that plagiarism is not the real issue. I think the fact
            that many felt The Far Country was a transcription of an actual dialog means
            this matter of plagiarism shows them a very different picture. It means the
            words really came from Paul's pen, with help from other authors, and not word
            for word from Rebazar Tarzs.

            > As for poor taste, I think it looks a lot differently now. I can look back
            at some of my early writings and see strong similarities with Paul's books. He
            influenced me significantly. Let's say I decided to leave ECKANKAR and start
            writing for some other teacher. Let's say I took some of my old writings and
            just re-worked them to fit with the new teachings. Now, somebody eventually sees
            that my writings are almost word for word from some of Paul's writings. Now it
            looks like I was "stealing" from ECKANKAR, and that the new teacher is just a
            spin-off.

            > It's all a matter of perspective.

            > I think Paul was clearly influenced by Johnson's books. He obviously liked
            them enough that he covered a lot of the same material, and even used very
            similar words in many cases, when he wrote The Far Country. However, he was also
            writing this at the same time as he handed Kirpal Singh his first draft of The
            Tiger's Fang. If Kirpal had not rejected his efforts, I believe Kirpal's
            students would have looked at The Far Country far differently.

            > On the other hand, I don't really know what Paul was thinking when he wrote
            this book. I do like The Far Country far more than Johnson's books, so I'm
            glad he wrote it. However, I do think that it is a serious negative to his
            popularity in the public sector. I'm not sure Paul would mind too much about
            that. - Doug.
            >
            > http://tinyurl.com/7stz3vz
            >
            > (4) February 2004:
            >
            > "[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I
            can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers
            words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying
            them? Yes. [....]"
            >
            > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264
            >
            > (5)
            >
            > March 2007:
            >
            > [...] Let me ask a question here: Do you have a problem seeing Paul's book,
            Stranger By the River, as a poetic work, rather than a factual account?

            > Do you think that Paul is quoting Rebazar's actual words there? Or is he
            trying to communicate the teaching that he learned from him?

            > I've noticed that a lot of ECKists readily accepted that Stranger By The
            River was a fictionalized piece, much like Khalil Gibran's works, but have
            taken The Far Country as something different.

            > So, yes, when you come to realize that The Far Country is a similar work of
            art, rather than a factual account, you might feel that somehow you were
            fooled. I've seen people go through this reaction, and then it becomes a trust
            issue for them.

            > I can relate to that. Although I always felt that The Far Country was much
            more like Stranger By The River. My reason: Paul is describing spiritual
            teachings here that are coming from a spiritual experience.

            > These aren't things that come in English. They are inner teachings. So, I
            always thought these were Paul's words and his creation, but that he was
            trying to describe something real in the best way that he could.

            In other words, he was writing the classic "as if you were there" book, to leave
            the reader with the impression as close as possible to what it was really
            like. [...] Which do you think Paul was writing about? Was he trying to write
            about historical facts, or was he describing spiritual truth? If the later,
            wouldn't it be best to review his works in this light? Why worry if his facts
            are not exactly right?
            >
            > http://tinyurl.com/7tuzbwd
            >
            > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer
            <jepfeiffer@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Prometheus,
            > >
            > > You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me. It gives me peace
            of mind to know that others did have them too. Thank you for being such a wise
            soul.
            > >
            > > Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that
            rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why? The circus of
            eckankar is mind boggling. The more I hear from experienced eckist, the harder
            it is to believe that it can stand as an organization. It appears like a house
            of cards. Do you think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and
            do you think the org is losing ground? I have read they exaggerate their
            membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event. Any ideas?
            > >
            > > Thanks
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@>
            > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
            (Revisited)
            > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
            > > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Hello Janice and All,
            > > Interesting. I think I'll
            > > share some comments
            > > to your insights below.
            > >
            > > Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
            > > "Prometheus,
            > >
            > > Now that is very interesting.
            > >
            > > I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so before
            I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling in line like a
            good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy. My experience was that I
            was just before falling asleep one night and I heard a loud voice which used a
            word I couldn't remember later. I know it started with a P.
            > >
            > > Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and then I
            felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but I was only half
            awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp. It was a strong male
            voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly looking little troll like
            figure came into my room and stood gazing at me through the metal barks on the
            foot board of my bed. In my dream I told it to get out now and never come back.
            It did.
            > >
            > > Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as being
            a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the dreams were even more
            so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my favorite character. He seemed
            the most spiritual at the time. I found it very confusing to have these dreams.
            > >
            > > I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term
            relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions that got me
            yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck teachings since becoming
            an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was true beauty in the teachings."
            > >
            > > ME (Prometheus): I know that
            > > many of us have had similar
            > > experiences of being attacked
            > > by negative entities and having
            > > to defend ourselves. In this case
            > > your RESA was, also, one of these
            > > negative beings. Too bad you
            > > couldn't protect yourself from
            > > them, but it's deceptive when
            > > one has placed trust in a RESA
            > > by assuming they are always
            > > positive and always on your side.
            > > They are as closed minded and
            > > defensive as is any religionist
            > > when protecting their dogma
            > > from too much scrutiny.
            > >
            > > "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it
            attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading all the
            things I would not read as a<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
          • etznab@aol.com
            What stood out to me most from the examples you listed was Doug Marman s use of the word facts . In the examples I gave - especially when Doug addressed my
            Message 5 of 14 , May 6, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              What stood out to me most from the examples you listed was Doug
              Marman's use of the word "facts".

              In the examples I gave - especially when Doug addressed my questions
              about Rebazar Tarzs on a.r.e. - it seemed to me that in some respects
              "facts" were somehow "secondary" to spiritual experience.

              I thoiught about the a.r.e. thread last night trying to fathom what
              Doug was saying about Paul's stories and things said (some of them) not
              based on facts. And frankly, it still didn't jive with me. Off hand I
              can remember at least two places where Paul Twitchell illustrated that
              Rebazar Tarzs "told him" what to write. In one place (I believe)
              Rebazar Tarzs comes to Paul's room, wakes him up, tells him to take up
              the pencil and write. (I'm referring to Dialogues With The Master and
              The Far Country.) So how can Doug suggest those were Paul's words based
              on a spiritual experience?
              Paul wrote (in so many words) that Rebazar Tarzs came and materialized
              in his room, and in one instance (I believe) the mattress sank from the
              weight of R.T. sitting on it.

              It would be nice if everybody didn't go away, all those Eckists on the
              newsgroups, and if the string of dialogues could continue today. I say
              this because there is a lot more information and examples available to
              share where many of "Paul's words" read as plagiarized from various
              books by other authors - none of them by the name of Rebazar Tarzs, or
              other Eck masters.

              ***

              "They" didn't succeed at booting me from a.r.e., and I didn't "move on"
              as once suggested. To the contrary I continued to research the FACTS -
              whether anybody likeed it or not - and have reams of examples (which
              can be illustrated and verified by REAL evidence and FACTS) about many
              of the things people were chewing on and debating over for years before
              I arrived. Some of the examples I (and others) have since found are
              those that not even David Lane was aware of (I'm talking about examples
              of Paul's writings compared with other authors) and I think probably
              that Doug Marman was unaware of.

              So new information has come in since the D.L. / D.M. debates, etc. New
              FACTS are now known. How facts can be important in one instance and
              something else in another ... I am not sure what Doug was talking
              about.

              I recall from the newspapers that sometimes when something happens that
              embarrasses the government and people want to know who is responsible -
              such as torture of prisoners, etc. - those higher up in the ladder
              have responded with things like: The first time I heard about it was
              from the news / newspaper. Iow, people claim ignorance and that they
              didn't know about something until it became public via the news. Well,
              to admit otherwise - and that they did know about it (and for a long
              time) - would be damning to them and public opinion would have them on
              a spike!

              Now I recall that (for some reason) Harold Klemp doesn't use the
              Internet. I'm sure he reads the newspapers and watches the news, but
              how much about the trove of FACTS regarding Paul's writings compared
              with other authors - INCLUDING REBAZAR TARZS - is in the newspapers, or
              on the evening news? (Maybe it should be?) Much of the new information
              and research has been put on the Internet. That's where it is (also in
              some books). And even there, we've probably all seen how apologists can
              argue against certain information being true, try to marginalize people
              and their research, even to the extent of suggesting (in so many words)
              that facts don't matter. Or, it's not about facts.

              Well, I've seen where it looks like people want to have it both ways.
              Facts matter. Facts don't matter. As far as research goes, and besides
              the stories of "spiritual experiences" that people send in, When was
              the last time the Eckankar website posted something about people doing
              real research into the stories told by Paul Twitchell? (Not to mention
              "research" about the stories sent in by Eckists today?) It was 1984
              when Harold came out with all that stuff about Paul Twitchell and when
              Harold did research. I wonder if they continue to research, or if (for
              some reason) it stopped a long time ago?

              Oh yeah, I remember it now.

              "[....] A few years after Harold became the Master [1984?], he began
              researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin
              turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say
              that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug
              Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records.
              Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which
              Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study.
                 
              "About this same time, Harold began hearing from a number of ECKists
              about passages in other books that sounded similar to Paul's, and
              further stories about how Paul had studied with Kirpal Singh and worked
              for L. Ron Hubbard, which had circulated around since the early days.
              So, with Paul's files handy, Harold started digging. [....] A few
              months later, after researching Paul's files more thoroughly, Harold
              began giving a series of talks and writing a series of articles to
              share the information he found. Although Harold never tried to force
              anyone to change their perceptions of Paul, he was clearly working to
              unfreeze the ideas that had developed over time so that we could all
              see Paul from a fresh viewpoint. [....]"

              [Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]

              "[...] Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
              Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
              1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on Sudar
              Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named Sundar
              Singh, who is not the same person at all.
              "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
              whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
              all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
              more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
              initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves.
              "Some people wonder if Rebazar Tarzs really exists. They ask if Paul
              just borrowed a name from the Far East and made him up. Yet people
              report having met the ECK Masters even before they ever heard of
              Eckankar. The ECK Masters are real."

              [Based on: Article (Looking at the Past for Spiritual Lessons) by
              Harold Klemp - see link]

              http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html#training

              They got reports? Hmm ... then maybe I should send in a report? :)

              I could give other examples where it looks like Eckankar is interested
              in stories from other people, including what people found by research.
              Apparently though, the LEM. isn't going to simply look at the Eck-Vidya
              and share answers to all of the questions people have. At the same time
              though, it looks like people pick and choose from all the information
              only what "THEY WANT" the facts to be and put the rest under the rug.

              If one disregards the reported facts written by Paul Twitchell
              concerning his meetings, encounters, and relationships with Eck Masters
              then where does it leave you? In Never Never Land with Peter Pan and
              Tinker Bell, etc.? (Hey look! He's playing a flute!)

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

              Are "spiritual experiences", the "stories" (and the stories that people
              send in) somehow more REAL than factual accounts which can be
              researched and verified? Or, Are "spiritual experiences" sometimes used
              as a label for anything a person wants to be true? Iow, does the land
              of make believe trump the actual facts? This is what it comes down to,
              IMO.

              -----Original Message-----
              From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
              To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
              <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Sat, May 5, 2012 10:57 pm
              Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
              (Revisited)

               
              BTW- Nacal and Usually Skeptical is (me) Prometheus:

              A Calm And Peaceful Message For All

              Please read this message in the calm and peaceful tone in which it is
              being typed.
              I have really been for the most part enjoying the dialogue on this
              message board.

              I would like to encourage Doug Marman to continue posting here. I think
              gradually
              we can all learn something that will help us move toward a greater
              understanding.

              We can do this together regardless of religious belief and possibly
              emerge in
              a place with no fences. I have many friends from different beliefs and
              something
              I have noticed in the last 10 years or so is that our differences don't
              separate
              us as much as they used to. There is a coming together of sorts and a
              move
              towards higher conciousness.

              I have seen this come about through heartfelt sharing of ideas.

              ***A question for Doug. Is Patti Simpson still an Eckist?

              I send all who read this my love

              Freeman

              Joey Ward
              02/09/2004
              Top

              Thanks Doug

              Thank you very much for the reply to the 5 questions that I asked of
              you. Also thanks for
              looking through Paul Twitchell's writings and finding the same thing
              that I found out about
              Paul not using the term MAHANTA until January 1969. It means a lot to
              me that you answered that question I ask a while back. I join Eckankar
              because the Mahanta was the highest state of consciousness in this
              world and in the inner worlds so said Paul Twitchell the 971st MAHANTA
              (the title he gave himself). I still wonder why Paul would say such a
              thing. To me this is the biggest lie that any person could say. To make
              up a line of Mahanta Masters, (highest state of consciousness and God
              made flesh) what was Paul thinking of. O' well !!! I guess the next
              time I see Paul in the astral library I will give him a kick in the
              pants.

              Thanks Doug,
              Joey Ward

              PS..... Doug, next time you see Harold, could you tell him that Joey
              would like to see Him
              start posting on The Truth Seeker Bulletin Board. It sure would be
              grand of Harold to do so.
              Thanks again for your help.

              Seeker For The Last Time
              02/08/2004
              Top

              Another X`Eckist Story

              I joined Eckankar in the early 80's, attracted partly because of their
              concept of Soul Travel
              and left in the mid-90's. I had become a 3rd Initiate by that time.
              Because of my outspoken
              aggressive remarks and asking too many questions about concealed facts
              about the organization, many wondered why the LEM had allowed me to
              reach that level.

              Initiations and secret words and the idea that we need a Master, mean
              nothing to me
              in this life because in my different existences I was connected to many
              of these concepts.
              There were times I needed these secret words and initiations and a
              Master and for those
              who need them now, it is OK. It is something many have to experience,
              if not in this lifetime,
              in a different one.

              In the mid-80's, I posted a few remarks on ARE. This was a good lesson
              for me, because
              some of the die-hard ECKists attempted to attack me with their "sword
              from the Sugmad"
              and "weed me out of the garden of ECK." I had no grudge against them
              because I knew
              they would learn to open their minds. At the time, they believed in
              what they did and
              that it was the right thing for them to do. I accepted it.

              I hadn't been on ARE for a long time but a few weeks ago I was impelled
              to go on it
              and out popped the information concerning Ford Johnson's book. In the
              past, ECKist
              would say it was the ECK or LEM. I ordered the book, which I am
              enjoying now.
              It brought back some memories of Eckankar.

              I was very surprised to see some of the die-hard and long-standing
              ECKists,including
              High Initiates, especially Nathan. This was a shock and it takes a lot
              to shock me. I am
              very happy for Nathan because we had communicated in the past. Nathan
              would make
              a very high class lawyer in this life(have no idea what he does). Boy,
              did he swing that
              sword for Eckankar. He left nothing standing. But that was then and now
              is now. I am
              happy, Nathan that you allowed yourself to open and move beyond the
              garden of ECK.
              There is so much more to learn.

              To some Eckankar is still a beautiful garden and I can respect that. I
              would like to stress
              that I have nothing against Eckankar and similar religions. They may be
              needed for souls
              to grow.

              I enjoyed reading the comments on this board..and I'll be back when I
              have time.

              I'll sign off with the name I used to use on ARE - Seeker, for the last
              time.

              Doug Marman
              02/08/2004
              Top

              A Few Responses

              I've received a number of comments to my last post.

              I will respond to some of the questions and comments.

              To Degar:

              I agree with you that no church, book or religion can replace the part
              of us
              that knows. We also both agree on the importance of fearlessness in
              seeing
              truth, and the importance of teachings with heart.

              My lights are fine, as are yours.

              To Joey Ward:

              I don't do yes or no questions, but I will try to keep my answers
              short:

              1. Did Paul Twitchell have the highest state of consciousness as the
              Godman
              as he told the world through his writings?

              I don't know how anyone could say who was highest or who is even higher
              than another.
              So, I would never say such a thing, myself. I don't even think having
              the highest state
              of consciousness should be anyone's goal. A person can gain a high
              state of consciousness
              and be unable to make a living here in the physical. That's not very
              useful.

              2. Does Harold Klemp have the highest state of consciousness as the
              Godman
              as he is telling the world throught his writings?

              Same as above, however, I will add this. I agree with the Sufis who say
              that there is
              what they call The Pole of The World. The Sufi teacher Ibn al' Arabi
              points out that this
              same principle applies at every level of human affairs. Another Sufi
              put it this way:
              "Just as there is someone who acts as the pole for the whole of
              humanity, so there
              are poles for every faith, community, occupation - even down to the
              level of towns."

              We sense when we are near such people since they seem to represent and
              carry the
              whole of the town or company or faith that they are a part of. Every
              age has those
              who carry the whole of things for the world at every level. We connect
              to that whole
              through their vision.

              However, I don't believe in saying who the Pole of the World is, since
              everyone needs
              to find this out for themselves. In fact, in most times through history
              the Pole of The
              World was hidden. The Sufis say this as well.

              3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works?

              Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes.

              4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters
              names on them
              as if the Eck Master were saying them?

              Yes.

              5. Who do you Trust to tell the truth about Spiritual truths? Pick
              one only. [Names omitted]

              I see all teachings as mines. The good ones are gold mines, but they
              all need to be sorted
              through to find the pure gold. I have found no outer teachings that are
              pure gold.

              The only place to test the gold is within ourselves, when we try to use
              it in our lives.

              You might point to an outer person. I would rather point to our inner
              knowingness
              to recognize truth. We often do pick it up from others, however.

              To Journey:

              You asked: "If you are not trying to undermine Ford and his book
              "Confessions of a God Seeker," why did you give such a negative opinion
              about the book in The Chanhassen Villager last November?"

              If you read my comments to the Chanhassen Villager, just like in my
              last post, it is focused
              on the errors in what David Lane has reported and the unfortunate fact
              that Ford repeated
              these as if they were facts as David did. I am absolutely amazed at how
              far the distortion
              of truths from David Lane has spread. I was disappointed that the
              newspaper had not done
              better research, and that Ford had not as well, especially since David
              Lane himself suggested
              to Ford that he study my book more thoroughly to see what had been
              discussed via the Internet.

              I am just as amazed at how quickly and completely people assume that I
              am some kind
              of pawn in a battle or fighting some kind of war against Ford for
              pointing out the errors.
              I guess this goes to show how far off perceptions of someone else's
              motivations can be.
              People will imagine what my motivations are, but they are a million
              miles from the mark.

              I do agree that some people like to win their arguments no matter what,
              and since I have
              no interest in that, this is exactly why I have said I would say no
              more about such things
              unless folks here were interested. From the responses I've seen, there
              doesn't seem to be
              much interest in what I was writing about.

              I think you are right that we should all look at our motivations. I
              have certainly done so and
              have tried only to offer help in clearing up some of the confusions
              that have been going on
              for a while by getting to the facts. I have tried to stay far from
              criticizing anyone else's beliefs, although I do think some friendly
              dialogue in this area is good.

              I think it is just as important to look at the motivations for bringing
              up my personal motivations. I have not questioned Ford's motivations,
              nor would I. I think his intentions are sincere. Getting stuck over
              another person's so-called intentions is often the way our Censor stops
              us from seeing another person's point of view fairly.

              When we get so attached to our cause, anyone who says anything that
              appears to interfere
              with our cause becomes or enemy. The motivations of our enemies are
              always wrong
              in our minds. Ask them and they would say the same about their enemies.

              It is a sad fact that public dialogue over religious matters is almost
              impossible these days.
              This was not true in America during its early days. Public dialogue was
              often lively and contentious, but never came to people disowning their
              neighbors or rejecting their families and friends like it does today.

              As far as I am concerned, we are all friends here with a common
              interest in Spiritual Truth.
              That is how I see it. And we will each decide for ourselves what is
              true, as we should.

              To DD:

              You wrote: "You spend all of your time chipping away at the edges of
              the argument,
              finding miniscule points of contention (a minor date discrepancy here,
              a location there)
              but not once do you address the underlying core truth that is being and
              has been expressed
              here from the very beginning."

              Exactly right. So why is everyone getting so worked up about it? Why is
              no one simply
              acknowledging the minor points and letting it go? These are not core
              truths, just a matter
              of correcting errors in fact.

              No, I don't agree that my "can't we all get along" message doesn't help
              us get at the truth.
              In fact, let me say it this way: If we can not listen to those who see
              things differently than
              we do, then we will never see Truth. This doesn't mean we should all
              agree, but it certainly
              does mean that we should be able to hold respectful and friendly
              conversations with those
              who have a different way of seeing things. We should be open to
              learning from others.

              You wrote: "Your method is to find a few unimportant discrepancies and
              use them
              as an attempt to discredit the entire revelation of overall truth
              discovered."

              This is incorrect. I am only trying to point out the errors. I am not
              trying to discredit
              the entire message. But clearly, after we have seen the facts for what
              they are, the
              overall picture does change somewhat. That's natural.

              Since so many of David Lane's claims are in fact not based on facts at
              all, but merely
              on imagined intentions and speculations, I have also offered other
              possible interpretations.
              My point is not that David's guesses are wrong and mine are right, but
              simply to show how
              widely interpretations can vary when there are no facts.

              You are the one who is painting a picture of black and white, not I. I
              don't see David
              or Ford as all wrong, nor as all right. I say let's find the gold
              wherever we look.
              Why blame anyone for the fact that everything they offer is not pure
              gold?

              Lastly, you suggest that I am defending a teaching and that I am an
              apologist.
              Okay, perhaps I am. I don't feel that is what I am doing, but I can see
              it would look
              that way to you. But surely you see that your comments are the same.
              You are also
              defending your beliefs. In fact, everyone who has responded to my post
              on this
              bulletin board has picked at what I would call minor, technical details
              and completely
              avoided my points. This doesn't mean you or anyone else here is any
              less sincere,
              does it?

              To Nacal:

              You asked: "Where do you ever give a reference or a quote from your
              sources?"

              They are in my book, and have been thoroughly discussed on
              alt.religion.eckankar
              and can be found in the records there. I would be glad to present them
              here as well,
              if anyone was interested.

              You asked: "Why have you returned without answering the questions posed
              to you
              by site members in previous postings? When did Twitchell first write
              about the mahanta?
              Was it 1969 as one site member has stated?"

              I answered last time that I had just moved to a new home and my files
              were still packed
              in boxes. They are still packed in boxes, but a few are handy so I
              pulled out Paul's old
              Wisdom Notes and Illuminated Way Letters.

              You seem to be right. Paul didn't use the word, Mahanta, until the
              January 1969 Illuminated
              Way Letter and the February 1969 Wisdom Note. Before then he mainly
              used, The Master, Spiritual Traveler, Teacher, etc. Not even the
              mention of Living ECK Master very often, although Outer Master and
              living Master were mentioned often.

              This is interesting. Thanks for pointing it out.

              You wrote: "You are also being untruthful when you say that you, "…
              have no
              desire to interfere with the beliefs of anyone."

              And how would you know that? You seem to know my own desires and
              intentions
              better than I do. Clearly I will need to ask you next time what my
              intentions and
              desires are.

              This is foolishness. Do you realize how hard it is to know the desires
              of your own children?
              How often do parents misunderstand what their children are trying to
              do? Have you never had this happen to you when you were a child? Yet
              you think you can actually guess my desires, when you don't even know
              me? Have we even met?

              Why do people spend so much time imagining they KNOW the intentions of
              those they
              disagree with?

              I see this with ECKists just as often as with David Lane and the group
              here. So, I'm not picking on this group. I see it as a real trap and an
              excuse to justify rejecting what another person has to say.

              You wrote: "You also claim to "have enjoyed the conversations on this
              bulletin board" and yet
              you only respond to selective questions."

              That's right. That was what I came here to share, after Ford claimed
              that I was not after the kind of truth that could be discussed openly
              and that my book was not about encouraging open dialogue. I came here
              for just that kind of dialogue, but guess what? No one here wants to
              discuss the facts or the errors openly.

              If I were Ford, I would care enough to make sure the facts I was using
              were accurate.
              I thought, especially as a lawyer, he would want to know.

              You wrote: "You attempt to confuse (like Paul and Harold) by twisting
              and abusing truth
              in order to blind the reader with your distortions and illusions of
              reality."

              If you really believe this, then why not point out a quote where you
              feel this is what I am attempting to do, rather than making broad
              accusations about my motivations? Why not just address directly what
              what I am saying and point out how you see it differently? I have no
              intention of twisting the truth in anyway at all.

              You wrote: "Is what Harold's teaches (Eckankar) a myth?

              "Since I brought the subject up can you tell me if the Holocaust was a
              myth or not?

              "Some things ARE black and white so just give a yes or no answer to the
              previously mentioned two questions. Please, no long-winded explanation,
              yes or no to each question."

              Sorry, I don't do yes or no answers, but I'll be glad to discuss your
              questions. Yes, I would say a lot of what is taught about Eckankar is a
              myth. Yes, I think a lot of what people think about the Holocaust is
              made up of myth as well. This doesn't mean that the Holocaust didn't
              happen, or that many of the stories or facts are lies. It just means
              that people often try to simplify things.

              History is largely made up of myth. There are a million personal
              individual stories about World War II, for example, yet the history
              books treat it as one thing that happened. The people who go through it
              don't see it the way the history books do. They were there, but the
              myths are what we can deal with to understand. Otherwise it is too
              complex.

              You wrote: "Doug, instead of focusing on David Lane or Ford's book
              let's now focus on the writings of Twitchell and Klemp and see where we
              can find inaccuracies, or is the world still flat to you? Did you like
              the posting from the May-June-July 1971 Mystic World about Twitchell?
              "No one really knows for sure where he came from, when he was born, or
              if his true name is even Paul Twitchell. How long he has been on this
              Earth planet is not known." Or, how about this quote from the same
              article, "Paul is known to the world as Peddar Zaskq, which is his real
              name, is an occidental." Wasn't this also his name for his last
              incarnation and his spiritual name?"

              Obviously we now know where he came from and was born (Paducah,
              Kentucky) and that his true name was not Paul Twitchell, but was John
              Paul Twitchell. We also now know when he was born (1909). Paul
              certainly didn't ever talk about these things, nor would he answer
              questions about them directly, and I think he liked the idea that his
              past was mysterious, and he helped to create this mysterious past. Yes,
              Paul is only known to the world as Peddar Zaskq because he told the
              world that was his spiritual name.

              And yes, this is the kind of writing that is mythological. Did you
              think I would say something else?

              You went on: "Let's now go back up to the preceding paragraph since you
              seem to claim to like "facts" (why don't you give your sources?). "But
              it is a fact that his Master Rebazar Tarzs, an ancient Tibetan lama,
              who appears to be in his early forties, was a young man when Columbus
              discovered America." Now, was that really a "fact," or a delusional
              belief, or a deliberate lie? Or, is it that, "There is a need of the
              people to believe in the magic of a saviour, and Sri Paul Twitchell
              knows this and acts out the part" (same article)."

              It certainly is no fact, since there are no records nor anything else
              to prove that Rebazar Tarzs even exists, never mind how old he really
              is. However, there is no proof that it is a lie, either. It certainly
              sounds far-fetched. But I don't think the belief in saints, saviors and
              spiritual teachers comes from the desire to believe in magic. I think
              it comes from the innate memory within Soul that there is a truth and
              meaning to life that most of the world seems to have forgotten, but
              some remember.

              As Rumi once said, the reason that false gold is so popular is because
              there is such a thing
              as real gold.

              Of course, mixed with this is that many people want a father figure, or
              want someone to take
              care of them and tell them what is right and wrong.

              You wrote: "The sad thing is that there is no freedom in religion…
              there is only control through the use of fear and surrender of the
              common sense of having an open mind, and of course, the dangled carrot
              of initiation and hope."

              It certainly seems that way. To me, without freedom there is no point
              to a spiritual teaching. It is simply a social group. There is more
              peer pressure and more influence from the people who want everyone to
              be harmonious rather than speaking honestly, than control from above,
              but in general I agree with you.

              You wrote: "Paul states, "Ramaji was one of the first initiates in the
              ancient Order of the Vairagi." It seems Paul has a problem spelling his
              name. "Ji" is a Hindu suffix used to denote respect and affection. But,
              Paul is not speaking of Rama."

              Why do you think that Paul is referring to someone different than Rama?
              The Hindus often add the "ji" to the end of a name, and sometimes it is
              written with only the "j". Take the name Shamus-i-Tabriz. Generally
              this is spelled, Shams of Tabriz. Same person. Jalalludin Rumi is
              spelled dozens of ways. Sometimes he is also called Mevlana. Same
              person. Sometimes it is written Shabda Yoga, sometimes Shabd Yog.
              Sometimes Yoga is spelled Joga. I interpret this quote from Paul to be
              referring to the same person as Rama, but if you feel otherwise I would
              find it interesting to hear why.

              You asked: "By the way, why has Harold evaded giving his birth date and
              age?"

              I don't know. Probably because it is a personal fact that has nothing
              to do with his role. But maybe it is just a hold-over from Paul. You
              would have to ask him. My guess is that he doesn't want people holding
              birthday parties because of his birthdate.

              You wrote: "Also, why is it Doug that on page 282 that Harold, the
              mahanta, doesn't even know today about an experience he had in1970. He
              states, "Was he really an ECK Master? Who can say?" Shouldn't the
              Master who is greater than the God of all religions know such things?"

              I would have to read the whole quote in context. It sounds to me as if
              Harold is asking a rhetorical question. In other words, who can say if
              he was a Master then?

              Actually the question I ask is how did Darwin know that he was the
              Mahanta, or how does Harold know this? Isn't this like any initiate who
              might think they have gained the next initiation? Isn't this the same
              question? How do they really know?

              You ask: "Are the initiations in Eckankar valid as a means to greater
              spiritual growth over those who are non-eckists? Or, is this a myth
              too?"

              I think the initiations are a mixed bag. There is definitely reality to
              them, from my personal experience. But they have become filled with
              myths as well. I can tell you that real Self-Realization is rare, HI or
              not. The initiation level doesn't prove anything. It is more meaningful
              as a personal matter than a comparison to others. I don't think anyone
              should be judging another person's worth or truth by what initiation
              level they are at. Including the Master.

              You asked: "Paul states on page 136 of Difficulties Of Becoming The
              Living ECK Master, "Cause with all of that, see, I write books in
              series. I have four books that are finished now; well, the Shariyat is
              a continued writing, but I've got three books actually." So Doug,
              where's book three? If it wasn't finished why didn't Harold go to the
              Astral Library to finish it?"

              Paul wrote a number of the first chapters to book three. I think he got
              to chapter three or four. That's as far as it has gotten. I think that
              Harold thought about completing book three but for some reason decided
              it wasn't his place to do so. I would be surprised if Harold ever
              finishes book three, or tries to. But you would have to ask him if you
              wanted to know.

              You wrote: "Was the "Moon Virus" that Twitchell warned of a myth or a
              self-promotional lie,
              or did he make an erroneous assumption or was it just conjecture (page
              234 of "Difficulties")? Show me where Kirpal Singh's name is used with
              Sudar Singh's?"

              I have no idea where Paul got the idea of the Moon Virus from. He
              certainly used it to gain some news. It is similar in some ways to the
              HIV virus in the way it has stumped the scientists, but I have heard no
              connection to the moon.

              Here is the first quote of Paul's where he mentions Sudar Singh, from
              the January 1964 Orion
              magazine:

              "I began my study of bilocation under the tutelage of Satguru Sudar
              Singh, in Allahabad, India. Later, I switched to Sri Kirpal Singh of
              old Delhi. Both were teaching the Shabda Yoga, that which is called
              the Yoga of Sound Current. I had to learn to leave my body at will and
              return, without effort..."

              Here is another quote from my book:

              "I have since found two other early articles of Paul's, that show the
              same thing: An article that ran in early 1966 called, Can You Be In Two
              Places At The Same Time?, shows Sudar Singh, from Allahabad, India,
              along with Bernard of England, a Self-Realization Swami who has a
              retreat in Maryland, Kirpal Singh of Delhi, India, and Rebazar Tarzs, a
              Tibetan monk.

              "The second article was called, The God Eaters, and ran in the November
              1964 issue of The Psychic Observer. In the article Paul talks about
              Rebazar Tarzu [sic], who he "made contact with...through bilocation,"
              and Kirpal Singh as his teachers. These examples clearly show that both
              Sudar Singh and Rebazar Tarzs were referred to, side by side with
              Kirpal Singh. It was not until late 1966 before Paul suddenly stopped
              referring to Kirpal Singh."

              You wrote: "You mention that you talked to Patti Simpson and basically
              she says it was "funny" how Paul would evade giving out information on
              himself. You wrote that Paul tried to leave information blank "when it
              came to filling out official forms," but found that, "they would gladly
              accept whatever he wrote whether it was right or wrong." In truth,
              Paul intentionally lied and mislead people. Ironically, this is one
              "fact" that you have supplied to help prove the validity of David
              Lane's claim! This is also proof that you don't even listen to your own
              words! Perhaps, this is because your conscious subjective (self) is to
              evade, and your unconscious objective Self (God-Soul) is to impart
              truth."

              If you want to imagine that, go ahead. I think there is a big
              difference between someone who is intentionally trying to mislead
              people about their age, and a person who refuses to give out their age.
              But if you want to say that both are technically lies, that's fine with
              me. It seems to me that you are just trying to make it look like
              something it isn't.

              Remember, the picture that David painted is that Paul lied to Gail
              about his age, as he had lied about his age his whole life. In fact,
              Gail knew perfectly well that Paul wasn't giving out his age, and so
              did everyone else. Pretty different picture if you ask me.

              Here's a similar example. David was accused of copyright infringment
              many years ago (ironic, isn't it?). It was over a book written about J
              R Hinkins group. Under oath he said one thing. In his deposition, also
              under oath, he said the opposite. The judge politely said that his
              testimony was untrustworthy. David claims that he was not trying to
              lie, he just didn't remember it correctly. However, the testimony shows
              that the first story he told seemed like the one that would best help
              his case. Later it turned out to be exactly the wrong thing, so when
              asked the same question in court, he answered the opposite way. He lost
              his case over this.

              Would you call that lying? David doesn't. I'll take David's word for it
              that he just forgot, even though it looks otherwise. I guess that's
              just how I am.

              You wrote: "Doug you have imagined facts through your own distorted
              belief system of myth being reality. You seem to be confused as you
              spread confusion to others (somewhat like Typhoid Mary).You have no
              idea of what fact or truth is because you are unable to hear truth."

              Mighty big claims. Why not just show me the quotes where you think I'm
              off base and share how you see it? Why imagine that I am unable to see
              truth?

              I'm sure I see it differently than you do. But I have few illusions
              about Paul. My point was to show how many illusions that David had,
              while claiming otherwise. Ford's book has got them now, too, since he
              was taken in by David's story. The irony is that those who are most
              concerned about pointing out the lies and illusions of others are often
              just as unwilling to admit and correct their own.

              However, if you feel that I've made any errors, please point them out.
              David caught a few, and I immediately corrected them. I would like to
              make my book as accurate as possible, and I'm in the process of making
              another edit to include the latest information, since we are always
              learning new things.

              Thanks for asking specific questions. More of this would make a real
              dialogue worthwhile.
              And I am glad to share the specific evidence behind my comments if
              anyone is interested.

              Doug.

              Degar
              02/08/2004
              Top

              Be The Now!!

              If you are a follower of the Clear Light and Silent Sound, then you
              follow the natural order of who you really are as Beingness. The secret
              between the truth and the lie, is intention. Intention is the prime
              mover of awareness. How many really see themselves as the observer and
              the observed, the now, the present. Look only to the temple within
              yourself, no church, building or outer temple will ever point the way.
              In fact remove or demolish all these objects of glory, pride and self
              righteousness for in the heart of the now resides the gift. "Remind all
              those that show you the way to the false temple of mortar and brick
              that you have out grown their cage and See now with the Spiritual eye
              only Truth."

              NO RELIGION can hold GOD to a given doctrine! Even the doctrine of
              Light and Sound…..

              Freedom can not be bound and Freedom will destroy all that try to hold
              it.

              Man is a funny creature, he seeks the company of the one and only
              primal cause even until death. He is even willing to kill to be near to
              it. He believes that distance exists between himself and his Maker and
              he must make a journey back to the Godhead. Knock, knock, is anyone
              home? Soul exists because it is GOD. God has never posed the question,
              "I love Soul". Your Higher Self JUST IS, no more
              - no less.

              Wake up!

              Dance, Sing and Be.

              "All thing must pass away" – George Harrison

              Hold on to the social consciousness if you must but as Ford and Gram
              are saying they only
              opened the door you must walk through and see Freedom for yourself. Not
              their truth, but yours.

              After the Temple of Eck was built, I made a number of visits to it. On
              one of my visits I noticed that the temples main entrance floor was
              cracked right down the middle. Eckankar had it repaired, so no one had
              any idea what had happened. If that had occurred in my life, I would
              have asked what Spirit was saying to me? Well I did….. What it told me
              was that the office(ORG) and the temple side(Spiritual) had a major
              division between them. Another way of seeing it was that the true
              teachings of Eck were no longer within the organization.

              Fear is the last thing to go…… Pure awareness of consciousness can only
              be experienced
              without fear.

              The events unfolding before us have the blessing of the Holy Order of
              the World Adepts
              or it would not be.

              This is not an end to something, but more of a beginning.

              Degar *

              Kermit
              02/08/2004
              Top

              Solipsist Reprieve: My Story -- Why I Left Eckankar

              Soul, if It exists, could have entered into the agreement to share the
              Eckankar dream. The purpose may have been for spiritual experience: to
              advance spiritually and learn to be of service in a better and higher
              way and to consciously learn a few other things, like the nature of
              illusion and deception. But if I believe that soul exists, then I am
              asking for another round of belief lessons. I had spiritual
              experiences, but how do I know that they are real now? All I know is
              that I am here now and even those two adverbs are suspect.

              Now it is the age of Aquarius and the Piscean age is over. Some
              astrologers say that the religions of the intercessor between man and
              God were an aspect of the Piscean phase. It is a strong aspect of the
              Aquarian age that the veils of the intercessors be lifted. And it
              implies a dark night for the wizard who commands his followers to
              "ignore that man behind the curtain." It is a bright day for expose'
              writers. Since reading the book, I have seen other works that expose
              Christianity and Judaism. All the political books are pointing out
              lies told by the governments and the other party and the history books.
              For the Christians out there: your version of "Confessions" may be the
              works of Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy. Lies and damn lies. All
              religions are of the cloth of deception, regardless of whose face is on
              the master.

              So it appears that Eckankar has decided to maintain its position as a
              spiritual middle school. We all saw this coming, felt it in many ways
              and Ford articulated it for our minds in a way that we could no longer
              ignore. We knew about David Lane and some of the plagiarism years ago
              and chose to forgive it. We wondered why Rebazar couldn't appear for a
              TV spot, if he was so physical. We were uncomfortable about Darwin
              being written out of history. The restrictive guidelines.

              When I went to receive my fifth initiation, the internal phrase kept
              repeating: "The bloom is off the rose. . . the bloom is off the rose."
              I wondered what that meant, but the meaning is emerging. The days of
              believing in Santa Clause are past. Time to take the next step in
              becoming emancipated. Joseph Campbell said that his studies gave him
              an overview of the myths and religions that precluded his having any
              spiritual experiences himself. It is like the old saying that he who
              carved the Buddha cannot worship it.

              But I had just finished the book and was casting about and asked spirit
              if it was true. The image of an animated Rebazar peered headfirst into
              my inner vision and then started to mirror every movement I made. I
              had never had an experience with him, but the message was that I was
              doing it and so I might as well quit struggling against the curriculum.
              "No more Mother Goose stories for you and you can pretty much forget
              about the tooth fairy," it told me.

              Now I suspect why Harold is always telling fairy tales. I see an image
              now of Paul laughing, after telling his audience that only a handful of
              them would understand what he was trying to say. What if he was trying
              to say that only deception exists in the world of illusion? Is Harold
              hinting that the teachings are a fairy tale used to teach a different
              lesson?

              Masters and lying liars do not come clean. But there may be more to
              this learning than is apparent. What if Harold had told us that he had
              discovered the truth about the whole sham and just said,

              "Well, you can call me Harold or you can call me Gerald, but you
              doesn't have to call me Sri anymore." Would that have been masterful?
              I do not know, but he didn't say that. He built a temple instead.

              One of the wake-up calls for me was an Ask-the-Master session for RESAs
              in one of the recent books. Those guys didn't know anything. They
              were asking questions and Harold was describing worlds and temples and
              I would like to think that RESAs should have been able to access that
              information themselves, if the path was working.

              But no mastership is happening here. With Eckankar producing only two
              and a half masters in almost 38 years, I was starting to worry that I
              wasn't on the short list, anyway. We're all better than we were and we
              are better public speakers, but that is not what we came for.

              We came onto the path because it promised mastership/enlightenment.
              One of the unspoken truths is that we don't have a chance of reaching
              it by way of Eckankar. It has been boiling us like frogs: slowly. By
              the time we have been around long enough to know that no one is going
              to go beyond the 8th initiation, except one guy, our minds are no
              longer independent enough to get that this path to mastership is not
              working and it not going to work.

              Now we have talked ourselves out of a way of life. Harold would
              probably say we have talked ourselves into a Dark Night of Soul. But
              that's the kind of beating we would be in for if we stayed around.

              I took a class with a lot of law enforcement types at one time. They
              said that everyone, except the most committed sociopath, has a need to
              tell the truth. The body language, tonal patterns and eye movements
              combine with other unconscious clues to betray a lie or a concealed
              truth. One way to conceal and deceive is to tell nothing but lies like
              Kevin Spacey's character in "The Usual Suspects." This may be how Paul
              Twitchell did it. There is a book about this subject called "Telling
              Lies" by Paul Ekman. It has been staring at me from my bookshelf for
              years and it has gradually dawned on me that the title and author may
              contain a hint.

              My inner voice says that there is only the one I Am that smears itself
              across the living tapestry and reabsorbs itself after one lifetime or
              many. So this baby is going out with the bath water.

              Thanks for tipping the scales.

              Kermit

              Journey
              02/07/2004
              Top

              Reply to GPk: On Unloving Attitudes

              Dear GPk,

              As to your unloving and lack of understanding attitude, I based that on
              what you said, especially in regards to your unkind words to Usually
              Skeptical.
              You also seem to be putting down people who are posting here on this
              message board. You continue to direct negative comments to others on
              this site. You come across as a very angry person so I am not
              surprised that my comments bothered you so much. You confused me
              because you sound like you are still an Eckist in your attacks.

              You are wrong in assuming I'm stuck/holding on to the teachings of
              Eckankar. I was not a member that long, but I read all of Harold's
              transcripts and several other books, attended Satsang classes, etc.
              From the get-go, it seemed like a lot of double talk and
              confusing--lots of contradictions. Your postings also attack Ford in
              that you said he was going to become the leader of a new religion, that
              would be no different from any other group. I think you are the one
              hung up on Eckankar. I am glad you are reading Ford's book. Then, I
              think your comments here would be made with a better perspective,
              regardless of your take on Ford's writings.

              It is obvious that the only self awareness that you have ever achieved
              has been of the little self. You seem to be still experiencing the
              brain washing of Eckankar. The comments that you have made indicate
              that you are only aware of the little self, rather than the higher
              self. Your initiation did not give you self-realization. This is the
              flaw I see in your reasoning. But this is all understandable because of
              the length of time you spent in the Eckankar organization--you have
              more to dump than I do. There is a massive amount of flawed concepts
              along with certain truths that have been mixed to such a degree that it
              is almost impossible to decipher it all. In addition to anger, there is
              fear that there is no truth out there--that you will not be able to
              find it. This is, perhaps, the root of your negativity that you have
              lashed out on this site. This is my understanding.

              Also, I have not touted the degree of my spirituality as you have. I am
              only a Truth Seeker.

              Best regards and good reading,
              Journey

              Willy
              02/07/2004
              Top

              FS Response To Ecki99 Plus 2 Laws

              Thanks for the thorough response to the questions raised by Ecki99 and
              others. As one other book (Christian Bible) often quoted notes "by
              their fruits ye shall know them". Why do so many Eckists see the
              activities of HCS and former members of Eckankar as a threat? There
              are no lawsuits filed, there are no media exposes, there is just the
              statement of spiritual truths as experienced by those who have taken
              the next step. There is no massive attempt to force Eck chelas to
              leave their path, if that is where they are comfortable. To each his
              own.

              Harold has made much of Richard Maybury's two laws namely:

              1. Do all you say you will do. (Your word is your bond, honor it.)
              2. Do not encroach on others or their property. (Respect the integrity
              of others.)

              I really like these two laws, since they contain so much of spiritual
              truth in so few words. And this world would surely be a much better
              place if they were practiced by more people as individuals, by nations,
              and by spiritual paths. Perhaps the organization of Eckankar and its
              leaders should consider how well they are honoring these two laws,
              especially in regard to former members and also in regard to current
              members.

              FS
              02/07/2004
              Top

              Response to Eckie_99: The Real Impact of Eckankar Mythology and The
              Role of HCS

              Dear eckie_99

              I may be starting to look predictable with the way I present my views
              to this website, but, as many of the questions put to this site are in
              defence of eckankar mythology, then one way of replying to these
              questions is to use the very mythology that is being defended in order
              to express the truer side of eckankar, the side the mahanta does not
              want to be seen. This reply therefore will be no exception. I feel sure
              that this will meet with your approval., seeing as I am using the
              constructed, contrived, compilations of the master compiler, one Paul
              Twitchell.

              I quote your own words:

              b. A Person who builds a framework that can help people grow
              spiritually, and shows it to the world, to be judged on its own merits.

              There is one point that you have failed to address in your defence of
              eckankar being a framework that can help people grow, and that is, `The
              growth of people spiritually within the framework of eckankar is
              dependant on Harold's acceptance as to what he sees as spiritual
              growth, or more accurately stated, what he is prepared to accept as
              `Truth`. I will therefore show to the world, and to you, another side
              of how this framework of eckankar really operates in helping the
              individual grow spiritually, and let the world judge it on its own
              merits. Firstly, let the world see some of the teachings of eckankar
              that will be relevant to this reply.

              Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
              " Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and
              the tests given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears.
              Every Spiritual Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela
              to call upon the Master. If the vision fails to reply then it is
              false".

              Shariyat, book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
              "Be on guard, lest he who seeks without the Vi-Guru finds those who
              only appear as the Holy One, claiming to be angels, or saints. Let
              none deceive the chela. If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he
              cannot be deceived by the kal Niranjan. If he has not the armour of
              Spirit, he can be misled".

              Shariyat, book 1, page 149. Third Printing 1972:
              "The ECKist knows that the presence of the Living ECK Master is always
              with him. He is never alone".

              What is presented here to the world, and yourself , is the truth of my
              own experience while within this framework of eckankar and its leader,
              the mahanta. Here is part of my letter to Harold Klemp in regards to my
              journal of recorded inner experiences that was sent to him while
              following this framework of eckankar, that you say, " can help people
              grow spiritually",

              "All that is contained within the journal has withstood the tests of
              the secret words that are
              required to be used to prove their validity and all that you are about
              to read, I stand by as true."

              Now friend, let the world see what the teachings of eckankar say about
              the inner experiences
              of a chela and how they are viewed within this framework.

              "The Shariyat book 2, pages 50-51: Second Edition 1988:
              "No ECK Master will acknowledge his appearance to another person.
              This is neither modesty nor is it a feeling of hiding something; in a
              sense he is letting the individual decide for themselves whether it was
              really him. He wants them to decide if it was reality. In this way he
              is not telling, nor confirming his presence with them in the Atma
              Sarup, but allowing them the independence of knowing and understanding
              whether it was actually him.

              If a person makes up his mind that the living ECK Master really
              appeared to him, then he knows it and this cannot be taken away from
              him, regardless. However, if he has to be told that it was the ECK
              Master, then he is always in doubt, for it was an outside source which
              gave him his information and not himself. It is superficial knowledge
              and not from his own inner source.

              He must always remember that the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master is not
              the one to tell him of his inner experiences, nor whether the ECK
              Master has appeared to him. But he must know this with a faith that is
              beyond anything that he has experienced and, therefore, it will stay
              with him. Otherwise it may fade in time, and the experiencer soon
              forgets whether it was really the ECK Master".

              Now let the world see the reply from the leader of this framework of
              eckankar that helps
              the individual to grow spiritually.

              Reply from Harold Klemp in regards to my journal of inner experiences
              while a chela under
              his claimed protection as the mahanta.

              "In response to your letter and journal of inner experiences which led
              you to think you have
              received the Rod of Eck Power. You have not.

              Your instincts were right not to believe this. The Kal misled you."

              Let it be explained to the world, and your own good self, that there
              was never any claim made to me having had received the rod of eck
              power, only that it was a possibility. Therefore, before we go any
              further, Harold Klemp is wrong in his statement. Now we must look at
              his other words, those of `The Kal Misled You`. Now friend, after
              being told I was misled by the kal, even though I have Harold's
              assurance that, `If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he cannot be
              deceived by the KAL Niranjan.`. he then fails to explain how this could
              have happened and failed to give any further guidance as to what I
              could do to prevent it happening again, although as we can see by the
              promise of this framework, I should never have been misled in the first
              place.

              Having now told me I was mistaken, Harold then goes on to lay the
              karmic responsibility upon me for being responsible for leading others
              off the path of eck.

              "This happens more often than one would care to believe. People who
              fall for this trick and
              mislead others off the path of eck become responsible for the karma."

              Let the world and yourself take note of these words, for we are told
              something very interesting here; "This happens more often than one
              would care to believe." Are not these words very thought provoking? Is
              Harold admitting that being misled by the kal while within this
              framework of eckankar,and, having his protection of the Vi-Guru, being
              misled by the kal is a common occurance? If this is so, then the
              claimed protection of the vi-guru must be failing to work. Not only
              that, the secret words must also be failing. Let the world see what
              eckankar has to say about the protection of its secret words:

              Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
              "Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and
              the tests given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears.
              Every Spiritual Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela
              to call upon the Master. If the vision fails to reply then it is
              false".

              Let it go on record that the visions within the journal's inner
              experiences did reply and that I used the Word, and Words as is asked
              of the chela. Some of these words being Sugmad, Wah Z, HU, Mahanta, or
              any of the names of the masters of the vairagi.

              Here I think we should let the world know just how important this
              figure of the mahanta, the vi-guru really is, otherwise they may not
              fully realise just how powerful the mahanta truly is?

              Shariyat book 2 page 196. Second Edition 1988:
              "The eck works are the most powerful in this world; and the mahanta,
              the living eck master, who is the vehicle and channel for the eck, is
              the most powerful being within the physical world, as well as the
              planets and all the planes within the worlds of God."

              Shariyat, book 1 says on page 81. Third Printing 1972:
              "He is stronger than any man in intellect or spirit, for he has
              unlimited power, and yet this strength is combined with the noble
              virtues of the humble and gentle. All people find in him inspiration
              for the development of noble character".

              Shariyat, book 2 page 184 Second Edition 1988:
              "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master has other titles. He is the
              Godman, the Vi-Guru, the Light Giver, protector of the poor, the king
              of heaven, saviour of mankind, the scourge of evil, and the defender of
              the faithful. He is the real and only power in all the universes of
              God. No one can harm him without his consent, for all that is done to
              him is given permission by the ECK, with his consent".

              To help further my spiritual growth within this framework of eckankar,
              the mahanta now goes on to say:

              "As a spiritual discipline you are put back to the First Circle of
              initiation and are to stand aside from all eck duties for the present."

              We can show the world that this is also against what the framework of
              eckankar teaches:

              Dialogues With The Master page 172:
              First Printing 1990 "Remember this that those who demand respect and
              love of others to themselves are only exercising the negative or
              attracting power. The true teachings do not discipline in any way; do
              not set up duties or difficulties or tasks for teaching their
              disciples."

              This framework also tells the world, and its followers, that the
              teacher will bring about any changes needed within a chela without any
              pain or difficulties.

              Illuminated Way Letters 1966-1971 page 54 Copyright 1975 by Gail
              Twitchell Gross:
              "It is doubtful that the teacher will sit with his chela and discuss
              any character faults of the aspirant. Hardly ever will the teachers
              tell anyone what is wrong with himself, but he will concentrate on the
              error and bring about the change from the inner to the outer world,
              without pain or difficulty to the chelas, very often without the chela
              having any conscious awareness of it."

              Dear friend, and the world. I am fully aware of what this framework of
              eckankar has done to me, I am also fully aware of what this framework
              has done to many others, and this is the reason why the framework of
              the H.C.S. was brought about. It was brought about to help those who
              have suffered the injustice of eckankar at the hands of its
              mythological mahanta and to give them support and a free voice.

              We can now look to another aspect of this frameworks teachings, if not
              its practice, that of calling upon the master when the chela finds
              themselves in any difficulty:

              I was now left with no other recourse to attain further guidance other
              than to write to the mahanta at the physical level. As yet, nothing has
              been given. Now for the eckankar apologists they can say, "Get It On
              The Inner", but, and this is very very very important, how can the
              individual `Get It On The Inner` when the mahanta has just told the
              individual that all they have received on the inner is the misleadings
              of the kal? That the chela has the right to call upon the mahanta is
              given in the frameworks teachings. Not only has the chela the right to
              call upon the mahanta, but the mahanta is bound by his duty to answer
              each and every call of this nature. Let the world see the following
              exhibit:

              Illuminated Way Letters, 1966-1971, PAGE 130 Copyright 1975 by Gail
              Twitchell Gross: "Whenever the chela experiences any difficulty with
              himself such as falling into the negative trap, or even with Soul
              Travel, he should call upon the Master to assist him, or conduct him as
              the soul traveller to the spiritual worlds. For the Living ECK Master
              is bound by his mission to answer each and every call of this nature".

              Let it go on record, that the mahanta has failed in his duty, both to
              give the inner protection that his framework promises to give, and that
              he has also failed to assist a chela when called upon to do so. Now
              the world can see what the framework of eckankar says about a master
              failing in his duty:

              Shariyat, book 2, page 219. Second Edition 1988:
              "If he falters or fails; it is possible that he may be taken out of
              this position; and if he falters in his responsibility while serving as
              the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master, it is possible that he must step
              down for another to take his place".

              Unlike the mahanta, I am prepared to let all see the contents of my
              journal and come to their own understanding, and, unlike the mahanta,
              I am prepared to answer any questions that others may wish to ask. The
              framework of the H.C.S. has provided this facility for openness and
              free speech, the framework of eckankar has provided only threats to
              those who voice dissension and doubt.

              Shariyat, book 1, page 91. Third Printing 1972:
              "To ridicule, to scorn, to speak mockingly of the word of the Mahanta,
              and not to have faith in him and the cause of ECK is to bring woes on
              the advocator of doubt. It brings his karmic progress to a halt,
              increases his incarnations in this world, and causes him to suffer
              untold hardships".

              Even if a chela, or chela's tries to broach a question that is not
              wanted by the framework of
              eckankar and its leader, its teachings provide a guidance for the party
              faithful of how to view
              this dissesion within the ranks.

              Shariyat, book 2, pages 25-26. Second Edition 1988:
              " It must be remembered that all complaints and all arguments against
              the ECK, which are directed at the Mahanta, are the works of the Kal.
              Such assaults on the Mahanta are those which originate from the Kal
              using the minds and consciousness of those persons within its power to
              destroy the Mahanta and the ECK, if at all possible. These are the
              works of the Kal, who uses religion, ministers, and lay persons to
              bring about the downfall of the ECK, because it is the truth. There
              will be those who call themselves ECK Masters and disguise themselves
              under the robes of the ECK, but they are prophets with false faces who
              are lying to the ECKist`s , but few if any who are true followers of
              the ECK are ever deceived by these agents of the Kal".

              What Harold Klemp and the eckankar organisation have chosen to ignore
              is that truth, a truth that can be proven, is not an assault upon the
              mahanta, it is an assault upon that which is untrue. If Harold Klemp as
              the mahanta and the eckankar organisation see, and feel, that this as
              an assault upon them, then it can only be because they have something
              to hide. Truth knows no fear, so why does the framework of eckankar
              hide behind a wall of silence, instead of making a stand upon its
              proclaimed truth in order to defend the truth of the sugmad and its
              faithful followers?

              Let those who have the eyes to see and the ears to ear reach their own
              verdict from the `Facts` provided by the framework of eckankar itself ,
              and its application of its teachings by the mahanta. `By Their Actions
              Ye Shall Know Them`

              Dear friend, and the world, I rest my case.

              Usually Skeptical
              02/07/2004
              Top

              Response to eckie_99: I Took Your Test and Got An "A" !

              Dear ekie,

              Well, I looked at your test questions and have the answers... !.)

              1.)
              Q- What is more ethically incorrect?
              A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold

              2.)
              Q- Who is less truthful?
              A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold (that was just like #1!)

              3.)
              Q- Who is spiritually more developed?
              A- "C" Those who are not afraid to see and hear truth

              4.)
              Q- What is a bigger spiritual crime?
              A- "C" Not to give people the opportunity to know and choose truth over
              lies

              That wasn't so hard after all... was it!

              I graded it myself and got 100% correct!

              Usually Skeptical

              --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18"
              <etznab@...> wrote:
              >
              > "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman
              admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"
              >
              > Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original
              links/threads for complete context.)
              >
              > To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is
              still a long post though.
              >
              > (1)
              >
              > Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online
              book:
              >
              > [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my
              self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day
              I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in
              the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his
              home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was
              trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The
              Master.
              >
              > The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by
              Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely
              sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was
              mimicking the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a
              discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I
              can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and
              I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today.
              >
              > So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had
              ever heard anything about it before. He immediately became interested,
              told me that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I
              told Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes
              I was sorting through, but I would run ho<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
            • prometheus_973
              Hello Etznab and All, Yes, as you ve pointed out (below) both Marman and Klemp have similar versions about the facts concerning Twitchell s fictional account
              Message 6 of 14 , May 8, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello Etznab and All,
                Yes, as you've pointed
                out (below) both Marman
                and Klemp have similar
                versions about the "facts"
                concerning Twitchell's
                fictional account of meeting
                Rebazar Tarzs. Too bad
                they overlooked Twitchell's
                version, and the timeline
                conflict, from his June,
                1971 interviews which
                are mentioned in "Difficulties
                Of Becoming The Living
                ECK Master":

                [Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]

                "[...] Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on Sudar
                Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named Sundar
                Singh, who is not the same person at all.

                "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves.
                "Some people wonder if Rebazar Tarzs really exists. They ask if Paul
                just borrowed a name from the Far East and made him up. Yet people
                report having met the ECK Masters even before they ever heard of
                Eckankar. The ECK Masters are real."

                [Based on: Article (Looking at the Past for Spiritual Lessons) by
                Harold Klemp - see link]

                http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html#training

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

                Fact: Twitchell was born on Oct. 22, 1908
                (According to Harold Klemp).

                Fact: Twitchell states on page 45 of "Difficulties:"
                "Sudar Singh... He died, I believe, if I'm correct,
                1937; could have been a year or two off someway
                there, but it was approximately in that year he
                passed away. We [Paul and his sister Kay-Dee]
                stayed there almost a year and were shipped
                home because our parents were screaming bloody-
                murder, and then finally they cut our money off
                and we were forced to return."

                ME: PT is, basically, saying that at 15 years of
                age this was his 1st trip to India. More "facts"
                to prove this are listed later.

                Fact: Harold Klemp attended and graduated
                from a private Lutheran all boys school and
                seminary.

                Fact: Twitchell states on page 47 of "Difficulties"
                "... the same thing occurs in the seminaries of
                the Christian church. These Christian seminaries,
                when you're training boys to grow up, they are
                looking for all the things which will explain to
                them manhood or the problems of life. It can
                create sexual aberrations... you can walk around
                the corner of one of the ashrams or the monasteries
                and find the boys there abusing themselves." (pg 47)

                ME: It's possible, according to Twitchell, that
                this "abuse" contributed to Klemp's mental
                break-down circa 1969-70.

                Fact: Twitchell states on page 48 of "Difficulties:"
                "After I had left India, came home, I was then about
                sixteen, I had a year or so to do some work in order
                to finish my degree."

                ME: PT Born 1908, plus, age 15 equals 1923.

                Fact: Twitchell states on page 70 of "Difficulties:"
                "Well, anyway, in about 1947, it was right shortly
                after the Indians nation, India received their freedom
                from England and then became a nation, and they
                had the great riots and that was over with. I went
                over to Darjeeling in the east section of India.
                Darjeeling is up in the northeast of India, right on
                the Sikkim border.... I went up there at the time
                after being over in Allahabad, and there wasn't
                much left there after Sudar Singh had passed away."

                FYI: [Actually PT changed Kirpal Singh's name to
                Sudar Singh, and Kirpal died two years after Paul
                in 1973]

                PT: "But then I went there and I'd been told
                that I would find the ECK Master Rebazar Tarzs.
                I've got something about that in one of my books,
                I think it's Introduction to ECK in which I have it...
                I stayed there for quite some time with him, six
                to seven months... Now, he initiated me there.
                I had already been initiated by Sudar Singh, the
                same as everybody else, the second initiation.
                And then I got the third and the fourth. I went
                up through about the seventh at this particular
                time.

                Then he moved across over into Kashmir,
                up in the Hindu Kush Mountains, and later
                [1951] but not on this trip, I followed him
                up there and got the finish of my initiations."
                [page 71]


                Timeline of Facts:

                1923 - PT claims that he and his sister met
                Sudar in Paris and traveled with him to India.
                This was PT's 1st trip to India at age 15 and
                received his 1st and 2nd initiations from Sudar
                Singh.

                1935 - Harold Klemp (on Eckankar.org) states
                that Twitchell, at age 27, was "exaggerating"
                and "twisting facts" to get into "Who's Who in
                Kentucky," and that Twitchell had never traveled
                all that far from home.

                1947 - PT claims he had his 2nd trip to India
                (at age 35) and received his 3rd-7th initiations
                from Rebazar while staying with him for six
                to seven months.

                1951 - PT claims he went back to India (his
                3rd trip at age 39) and received the "finish"
                of his initiations from Rebazar Tarzs.

                Did Twitchell "finish" with a 9th or a 12th
                initiation in 1951?

                Fact: In any case, the 14th Mahanta was never
                mentioned by Twitchell until January 1969.

                Fact: Harold Klemp states on eckankar.org
                that at age 27 (1935) that Twitchell was
                "exaggerating" and "twisting facts" to get
                into Who's Who in Kentucky and that PT
                had never traveled all that far from home
                as he was claiming.

                Factual Conclusion:

                Twitchell lied about going to India to
                meet Sudar Singh at age 15, plus, he
                lied about this in 1971 as the "Mahanta"
                just months before his untimely death.

                And, PT continued the lie with the story
                of meeting Rebazar in 1947. He connected
                that lie to the one about getting his 1st
                and 2nd initiations from Sudar, in India,
                at the age of 15.

                Thus, the story about meeting Rebazar,
                again, on a third visit, circa 1951, to
                "finish" his initiations is also a fabrication
                of truth! Paul couldn't help himself. PT
                was a habitual liar and a narcissist, and
                for Klemp to point that out just shows
                that HK was not only ignorant of the
                timeline, but isn't all that capable/aware
                of connecting the dots.

                Plus, after Twitchell, supposedly,
                received the "finish" of his initiations,
                in 1951, it took until 1969 [18 years!]
                for Twitchell to mention the "Mahanta"
                for the first time in an ECK publication.
                This is more proof that Twitchell created
                the Mahanta just as he created Rebazar
                and the other ECK Masters... it's all
                a big fat lie! Even the Sant Mat crap
                that Twitchell copied and tweaked
                is a false teaching.

                These facts are the main reason this
                book, "Difficulties Of Becoming The
                Living ECK Master" will never ever be
                reprinted.... without heavy handed
                reediting.

                Prometheus


                etznab@... wrote:
                >
                > What stood out to me most from the examples you listed was Doug
                > Marman's use of the word "facts".
                >
                > In the examples I gave - especially when Doug addressed my questions
                > about Rebazar Tarzs on a.r.e. - it seemed to me that in some respects
                > "facts" were somehow "secondary" to spiritual experience.
                >
                > I thoiught about the a.r.e. thread last night trying to fathom what
                > Doug was saying about Paul's stories and things said (some of them) not
                > based on facts. And frankly, it still didn't jive with me. Off hand I
                > can remember at least two places where Paul Twitchell illustrated that
                > Rebazar Tarzs "told him" what to write. In one place (I believe)
                > Rebazar Tarzs comes to Paul's room, wakes him up, tells him to take up
                > the pencil and write. (I'm referring to Dialogues With The Master and
                > The Far Country.) So how can Doug suggest those were Paul's words based
                > on a spiritual experience?
                > Paul wrote (in so many words) that Rebazar Tarzs came and materialized
                > in his room, and in one instance (I believe) the mattress sank from the
                > weight of R.T. sitting on it.
                >
                > It would be nice if everybody didn't go away, all those Eckists on the
                > newsgroups, and if the string of dialogues could continue today. I say
                > this because there is a lot more information and examples available to
                > share where many of "Paul's words" read as plagiarized from various
                > books by other authors - none of them by the name of Rebazar Tarzs, or
                > other Eck masters.
                >
                > ***
                >
                > "They" didn't succeed at booting me from a.r.e., and I didn't "move on"
                > as once suggested. To the contrary I continued to research the FACTS -
                > whether anybody likeed it or not - and have reams of examples (which
                > can be illustrated and verified by REAL evidence and FACTS) about many
                > of the things people were chewing on and debating over for years before
                > I arrived. Some of the examples I (and others) have since found are
                > those that not even David Lane was aware of (I'm talking about examples
                > of Paul's writings compared with other authors) and I think probably
                > that Doug Marman was unaware of.
                >
                > So new information has come in since the D.L. / D.M. debates, etc. New
                > FACTS are now known. How facts can be important in one instance and
                > something else in another ... I am not sure what Doug was talking
                > about.
                >
                > I recall from the newspapers that sometimes when something happens that
                > embarrasses the government and people want to know who is responsible -
                > such as torture of prisoners, etc. - those higher up in the ladder
                > have responded with things like: The first time I heard about it was
                > from the news / newspaper. Iow, people claim ignorance and that they
                > didn't know about something until it became public via the news. Well,
                > to admit otherwise - and that they did know about it (and for a long
                > time) - would be damning to them and public opinion would have them on
                > a spike!
                >
                > Now I recall that (for some reason) Harold Klemp doesn't use the
                > Internet. I'm sure he reads the newspapers and watches the news, but
                > how much about the trove of FACTS regarding Paul's writings compared
                > with other authors - INCLUDING REBAZAR TARZS - is in the newspapers, or
                > on the evening news? (Maybe it should be?) Much of the new information
                > and research has been put on the Internet. That's where it is (also in
                > some books). And even there, we've probably all seen how apologists can
                > argue against certain information being true, try to marginalize people
                > and their research, even to the extent of suggesting (in so many words)
                > that facts don't matter. Or, it's not about facts.
                >
                > Well, I've seen where it looks like people want to have it both ways.
                > Facts matter. Facts don't matter. As far as research goes, and besides
                > the stories of "spiritual experiences" that people send in, When was
                > the last time the Eckankar website posted something about people doing
                > real research into the stories told by Paul Twitchell? (Not to mention
                > "research" about the stories sent in by Eckists today?) It was 1984
                > when Harold came out with all that stuff about Paul Twitchell and when
                > Harold did research. I wonder if they continue to research, or if (for
                > some reason) it stopped a long time ago?
                >
                > Oh yeah, I remember it now.
                >
                > "[....] A few years after Harold became the Master [1984?], he began
                > researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin
                > turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say
                > that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug
                > Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records.
                > Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which
                > Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study.
                > Â Â
                > "About this same time, Harold began hearing from a number of ECKists
                > about passages in other books that sounded similar to Paul's, and
                > further stories about how Paul had studied with Kirpal Singh and worked
                > for L. Ron Hubbard, which had circulated around since the early days.
                > So, with Paul's files handy, Harold started digging. [....] A few
                > months later, after researching Paul's files more thoroughly, Harold
                > began giving a series of talks and writing a series of articles to
                > share the information he found. Although Harold never tried to force
                > anyone to change their perceptions of Paul, he was clearly working to
                > unfreeze the ideas that had developed over time so that we could all
                > see Paul from a fresh viewpoint. [....]"
                >
                > [Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
                >
                > "[...] Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on Sudar
                > Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named Sundar
                > Singh, who is not the same person at all.
                > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves.
                > "Some people wonder if Rebazar Tarzs really exists. They ask if Paul
                > just borrowed a name from the Far East and made him up. Yet people
                > report having met the ECK Masters even before they ever heard of
                > Eckankar. The ECK Masters are real."
                >
                > [Based on: Article (Looking at the Past for Spiritual Lessons) by
                > Harold Klemp - see link]
                >
                > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html#training
                >
                > They got reports? Hmm ... then maybe I should send in a report? :)
                >
                > I could give other examples where it looks like Eckankar is interested
                > in stories from other people, including what people found by research.
                > Apparently though, the LEM. isn't going to simply look at the Eck-Vidya
                > and share answers to all of the questions people have. At the same time
                > though, it looks like people pick and choose from all the information
                > only what "THEY WANT" the facts to be and put the rest under the rug.
                >
                > If one disregards the reported facts written by Paul Twitchell
                > concerning his meetings, encounters, and relationships with Eck Masters
                > then where does it leave you? In Never Never Land with Peter Pan and
                > Tinker Bell, etc.? (Hey look! He's playing a flute!)
                >
                > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neverland
                >
                > Are "spiritual experiences", the "stories" (and the stories that people
                > send in) somehow more REAL than factual accounts which can be
                > researched and verified? Or, Are "spiritual experiences" sometimes used
                > as a label for anything a person wants to be true? Iow, does the land
                > of make believe trump the actual facts? This is what it comes down to,
                > IMO.
              • Janice Pfeiffer
                Thank you etznab for clarifying.  ... From: etznab18 Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited) To:
                Message 7 of 14 , May 9, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Thank you etznab for clarifying. 

                  --- On Sun, 5/6/12, etznab18 <etznab@...> wrote:

                  From: etznab18 <etznab@...>
                  Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
                  To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Sunday, May 6, 2012, 2:50 AM

                   
                  "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"

                  Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original links/threads for complete context.)

                  To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is still a long post though.

                  (1)

                  Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online book:

                  [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The Master.

                  The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicking the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today.

                  So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had ever heard anything about it before. He immediately became interested, told me that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I told Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes I was sorting through, but I would run home to get it for him. I immediately jumped up to head for my car.

                  It was at this point that Darwin said something that left me with a deep impression. He saw that I was hurrying toward my car in my desire to get the tape for him, and he said, "Take your time." He then paused, as if he was saying something very important, and he added, "There is never any reason to rush." [... .]

                  http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Nine.htm

                  (2)

                  July 2001:

                  "The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT my invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David Lane?]

                  Kirpal "thought" Twitchell was denying it. How interesting. Why doesn't David show us the rest of the quote, which explains why Kirpal thought that? Kirpal makes it very clear that he is referring to The Tiger's Fang, which in its first draft mentioned Kirpal as Paul's teacher, but was changed to Rebazar Tarzs by the time it was published in 1967. [....]" - [Doug Marman?]

                  http://tinyurl.com/4x3kl25

                  (3)

                  July 2003:

                  Interesting, Doug. I have mixed feeling about the "plagerism". For thos most part, I see the copied info as generally either common themes or insignificant fillers. However, I find the quotes where he claimed to have come from Rebazar to have been done in really poor taste... and perhaps not a great move in his part ???
                  What are your on that stuff ?
                  I agree with you that plagiarism is not the real issue. I think the fact that many felt The Far Country was a transcription of an actual dialog means this matter of plagiarism shows them a very different picture. It means the words really came from Paul's pen, with help from other authors, and not word for word from Rebazar Tarzs.
                  As for poor taste, I think it looks a lot differently now. I can look back at some of my early writings and see strong similarities with Paul's books. He influenced me significantly. Let's say I decided to leave ECKANKAR and start writing for some other teacher. Let's say I took some of my old writings and just re-worked them to fit with the new teachings. Now, somebody eventually sees that my writings are almost word for word from some of Paul's writings. Now it looks like I was "stealing" from ECKANKAR, and that the new teacher is just a spin-off.
                  It's all a matter of perspective.
                  I think Paul was clearly influenced by Johnson's books. He obviously liked them enough that he covered a lot of the same material, and even used very similar words in many cases, when he wrote The Far Country. However, he was also writing this at the same time as he handed Kirpal Singh his first draft of The Tiger's Fang. If Kirpal had not rejected his efforts, I believe Kirpal's students would have looked at The Far Country far differently.
                  On the other hand, I don't really know what Paul was thinking when he wrote this book. I do like The Far Country far more than Johnson's books, so I'm glad he wrote it. However, I do think that it is a serious negative to his popularity in the public sector. I'm not sure Paul would mind too much about that. - Doug.

                  http://tinyurl.com/7stz3vz

                  (4) February 2004:

                  "[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. [....]"

                  http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264

                  (5)

                  March 2007:

                  [...] Let me ask a question here: Do you have a problem seeing Paul's book, Stranger By the River, as a poetic work, rather than a factual account?
                  Do you think that Paul is quoting Rebazar's actual words there? Or is he trying to communicate the teaching that he learned from him?
                  I've noticed that a lot of ECKists readily accepted that Stranger By The River was a fictionalized piece, much like Khalil Gibran's works, but have taken The Far Country as something different.
                  So, yes, when you come to realize that The Far Country is a similar work of art, rather than a factual account, you might feel that somehow you were fooled. I've seen people go through this reaction, and then it becomes a trust issue for them.
                  I can relate to that. Although I always felt that The Far Country was much more like Stranger By The River. My reason: Paul is describing spiritual teachings here that are coming from a spiritual experience.
                  These aren't things that come in English. They are inner teachings. So, I always thought these were Paul's words and his creation, but that he was trying to describe something real in the best way that he could.
                  In other words, he was writing the classic "as if you were there" book, to leave the reader with the impression as close as possible to what it was really like. [...] Which do you think Paul was writing about? Was he trying to write about historical facts, or was he describing spiritual truth? If the later, wouldn't it be best to review his works in this light? Why worry if his facts are not exactly right?

                  http://tinyurl.com/7tuzbwd

                  --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer <jepfeiffer@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Prometheus,
                  >  
                  > You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me.  It gives me peace of mind to know that others did have them too.  Thank you for being such a wise soul.
                  >  
                  > Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary?  To whom did he tell this and why?  The circus of eckankar is mind boggling.  The more I hear from experienced eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand as an organization.  It appears like a house of cards.  Do you think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you think the org is losing ground?  I have read they exaggerate their membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event.  Any ideas?
                  >  
                  > Thanks
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                  > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
                  > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                  > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >  
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Hello Janice and All,
                  > Interesting. I think I'll
                  > share some comments
                  > to your insights below.
                  >
                  > Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
                  > "Prometheus,
                  >
                  > Now that is very interesting.
                  >
                  > I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so before I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy. My experience was that I was just before falling asleep one night and I heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember later. I know it started with a P.
                  >
                  > Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but I was only half awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp. It was a strong male voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood gazing at me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed. In my dream I told it to get out now and never come back. It did.
                  >
                  > Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as being a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the dreams were even more so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my favorite character. He seemed the most spiritual at the time. I found it very confusing to have these dreams.
                  >
                  > I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions that got me yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck teachings since becoming an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was true beauty in the teachings."
                  >
                  > ME (Prometheus): I know that
                  > many of us have had similar
                  > experiences of being attacked
                  > by negative entities and having
                  > to defend ourselves. In this case
                  > your RESA was, also, one of these
                  > negative beings. Too bad you
                  > couldn't protect yourself from
                  > them, but it's deceptive when
                  > one has placed trust in a RESA
                  > by assuming they are always
                  > positive and always on your side.
                  > They are as closed minded and
                  > defensive as is any religionist
                  > when protecting their dogma
                  > from too much scrutiny.
                  >
                  > "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading all the things I would not read as an eckist. It took me about another year to start feeling like a normal person. I must say that the attack seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of eckankar claim in theirs writings. It didn't appear to be a positive thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I wasn't conforming properly. I didn't insult people or even respond to them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many occasions when asked personal questions. Privacy doesn't seem to be respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories about the personal lives of other eckist."
                  >
                  > ME: Yes. One has to give-in and give-up.
                  > Some say, Let-go and Let-God. But, with
                  > ECKankar they will say to remain skeptical
                  > until you can "prove it" to yourself. But,
                  > the catch is that there's a time limit for
                  > being skeptical. True, when one seeks
                  > the "Truth" via introspection and uses
                  > meditation/contemplation one will change
                  > and see with new eyes, but that's not due
                  > to any fake Mahanta or borrowed and
                  > tweaked Sant Mat dogma. One will naturally
                  > dream and imagine all sorts of things
                  > when attention is placed upon these
                  > areas and topics. That's what Twitchell
                  > and every other conman knew and uses
                  > and what Klemp continues to use as
                  > a hook. It's a slight-of-hand deception
                  > the magician uses while the viewer's
                  > attention is distracted elsewhere.
                  >
                  >
                  > "I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with demons. I am not sure demons are real and separate entities. I have always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or demonic that threatens their views so if I read what they have to say, I dismiss a lot of it. If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't have a reason to exist. This article starts out like most religious hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature of eckankar."
                  >
                  > ME: I'm, also, not so sure that demons
                  > are real. It could very well be that demons
                  > are metaphors for those things that bother
                  > and bind us to negativity, fear, self-doubt
                  > and even to self-loathing. Actually, isn't
                  > all religious dogma full of hidden metaphors?
                  > This is where the fanatics and the fundamentalists
                  > have problems since they tend to pick and
                  > choose what is easy for them to believe
                  > since they tend to be more simple-minded
                  > and tend to see most everything in literal,
                  > narrow, terms.
                  >
                  >
                  > "I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master and he thinks he is doing a lot of good. I think he is just the puppet for the more scheming higher ups. I really don't s
                  > see anything really outstanding about klemp at all. That was my biggest problem with eckankar. When I would do the gazing at the mahanta thing using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly looking man. He even looked miserable. I saw no power. He wasn't charismatic. He wasn't very intelligent and he had no creative ability that I could see. He like twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources outside of eckankar for spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to me at times comical. As long as he was being told he was the great eck master, he probably was easily controlled by the gang of money hounds making up corporate eckankar."
                  >
                  > ME: Klemp is the Higher Up.
                  > He had the by-laws changed
                  > after he took over from D.G.
                  > and neither the President nor
                  > the EK Board has any voting
                  > authority. Only Klemp can hire
                  > and fire. The local Satsang
                  > Societies and local Boards have
                  > been set up the same (As Above).
                  > Thus, the RESAs can hire and
                  > fire the local Presidents and
                  > Board members and the votes
                  > of Board members carry no
                  > authority! The RESA has the
                  > sole authority, unless, a higher
                  > authority at the ESC steps in.
                  > However, when this is done
                  > it is always with the approval
                  > of Klemp and under his direction.
                  >
                  >
                  > "It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by twitchell and others that the average person would think is not spiritual. I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been removed from print."
                  >
                  > ME: "Difficulties Of Becoming The Living
                  > ECK Master" was the best book written
                  > depicting Twitchell's egomaniacal rants.
                  > There were three interviews done around
                  > June 1971 while PT was the full blown
                  > self-proclaimed Mahanta. What's amazing
                  > is that after all of these years he's still
                  > lying about his past. Klemp has stated
                  > on Eckankar.org that Twit was "exaggerating"
                  > and "twisting facts" to get into Kentucky's
                  > Who's Who and had never traveled all that
                  > far from home. Yet, Twitchell (in this June,
                  > 1971 interview), is saying he was almost
                  > 16 years old when he, first, went from
                  > Paris to India, with his sister, to be with
                  > Sudar Singh. There are more examples
                  > that are even more outlandish. Paul's
                  > comments about how he confused things
                  > and screwed up paperwork so that he
                  > could take it easy during the start of
                  > WWII showed a level of subversion and
                  > sabotage that even the Nazis couldn't
                  > accomplish!
                  >
                  > "I've never talked about the experience before because I found it so confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little bit nuts to even have those things. Any feed back from more knowledgeable eckist would be greatly appreciated. I don't know about demons but it was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking the chains of eckankar for me. They need more slaves to bring in recruits for more money and more influence. I wasn't doing that. I am thankful that although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did not drag a single soul into eckankar. Well, not that I know of anyway. Guess I wasn't a very good eckiest. I wasn't capable of it and I am ashamed of myself for ever being a member. Coming out of it, I think most people feel dumb, gullible and used."
                  >
                  > ME: I think that we all have to get
                  > over the guilt and shame of being
                  > tricked. Look at all of those who
                  > belong to a religion and donate
                  > time and money in order to get
                  > their "feel good" fix. Religions
                  > are types of opiates... Eckankar
                  > too! People need to believe in
                  > something that can give them
                  > hope and to help them to maintain
                  > a positive outlook. And, conmen
                  > know what people want and need.
                  > Attitude is, also, important but
                  > there's a fine line between being
                  > positive and being delusional.
                  > Sometimes it's difficult to know
                  > where to draw the line and some
                  > of us have more difficulty with
                  > seeing the good versus seeing
                  > the bad. However, I don't think
                  > that seeing the glass half-empty
                  > is always wrong, but it does present
                  > more of a challenge to overcome.
                  >
                  > "Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't healthy. I am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems. Some of them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot. Anyway, I was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe mental conditions previously or since becoming eckist. But why couldn't this great living eck master help them over come these things or at least help them adjust better to the physical world? If the living eck master had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being? Why does klemp describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in public? Not in my opinion anyway. Is it because after being proclaimed the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was woven into a spiritual experience as kind of a necessary
                  > ordeal? Did he go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in twitchells shoes and he mentally duplicated twithells experience?"
                  >
                  > ME: I don't believe that Twitchell
                  > ever needed to jump off a bridge
                  > and do a strip tease at an airport
                  > and choose jail or a mental institution
                  > in order to "find God." Besides, Twit
                  > was a liar up to the moment of his
                  > untimely death and, thus, was not
                  > a "spiritual being." It was all about
                  > him. Besides, many people have
                  > done stupid things when confused
                  > with life and have sought "spiritual
                  > solutions." If one chose to, one could
                  > claim that their mental missteps
                  > and episodes were "spiritual
                  > experiences" as Klemp has done.
                  > Klemp is merely doing a 20/20
                  > hindsight, and PR rewrite, to
                  > excuse his mental confusion.
                  > After all, HK's the leader of a
                  > church and has to be above
                  > and beyond reproach. It's a
                  > pretend game where he has
                  > to, partially, buy into the hype
                  > in order to seem authentic.
                  >
                  > "I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and who appeared to be warm caring human beings. Some appeared to be well adjusted people. Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving. Maybe it is possible to grow in eckankar."
                  >
                  > ME: I, too, know and remember some
                  > H.I.s whom I like. They are nice people...
                  > as long as they don't know who I am.
                  > That could/would change I'm sure.
                  > They would feel betrayed and insulted
                  > and I could understand that, however,
                  > that, too, would be a "spiritual" test!
                  > To "grow in eckankar?" Sure, but it's
                  > not due to Eckankar or because of
                  > inner guidance by a fake mahanta.
                  > That crap just gets in the way and
                  > causes more codependency. Any
                  > growth or realization leading to
                  > an expanded awareness is learned
                  > and earned by the individual. It's
                  > their own personal and private
                  > relationship to the Holy Spirit or
                  > whatever one wants to call this
                  > divine essence, or not, that leads
                  > to a divine knowingness and to
                  > contentment!
                  >
                  > "I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings came from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several high initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed relevant at the time. One female told me, you take the parts you can use and toss the rest. I guess the idea was that with the teachings being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which ones to keep. Also, if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as needed. Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person. Lies should not be knowingly condoned."
                  >
                  > ME: Actually, accepting Eckankar
                  > while knowing about the deceptions
                  > and lies is rationalizing. It's like,
                  > if it's not broke why fix it? Or,
                  > why throw the baby out with the
                  > (dirty) bath water? Nothing, and
                  > nobody (Klemp), in the lower worlds
                  > of KAL is perfect. Thus, if it (Eckankar)
                  > works why complain? H.I.s have
                  > put blinders on in order to stay
                  > the course and maintain their
                  > prestigious positions which took
                  > them decades of time and money
                  > to obtain. Many have rejected, in
                  > part, HK's RESA structure and the
                  > ESA Guidelines. Yes, I knew of H.I.s
                  > that did the same... picked and
                  > chose what they wanted to follow
                  > and believe. However, that's not
                  > the way Eckankar is supposed to
                  > work. One is supposed to take
                  > the bait and swallow it hook, line,
                  > and sinker! Twit, supposedly, took
                  > only the best from all of the other
                  > religions and experts, etc. in order
                  > to create (or bring forth) the EK
                  > dogma to the modern Western
                  > world. Thus, how can one pick
                  > and chose when it's all, supposedly,
                  > relevant? If a person is not consciously
                  > following the guidance and the will
                  > of the LEM/Mahanta (Klemp), then,
                  > they are heretics!
                  >
                  > "I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other than eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as greater than anything else. They are under the eckankar spell. I still wouldn't want contact with them though. I just couldn't listen that eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel for them. It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them. So, I just remember the good and bless them in my heart."
                  >
                  > ME: True! It's nice to belong.
                  > Humans are social animals
                  > and most like to follow in
                  > one way or another because
                  > it's easier to follow than to
                  > lead. Being a follower requires
                  > less thought and energy. It's
                  > less demanding, less consuming,
                  > and is less stressful. It is true
                  > that the Higher one is with
                  > initiations, years, and titles
                  > the more lost that individual
                  > is. They've bought into it
                  > to the extreme. Look at Marge
                  > Klemp! However, the ones
                  > to really feel sorry for are those
                  > ESC staffers who know it's all
                  > a sham and Klemp is a poser,
                  > but they have to put on an act
                  > in order to keep their jobs,
                  > health care, retirement, etc.
                  >
                  >
                  > "Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar with. I will look them up but any info any of you can share would be appreciated. Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh? Are these really old names in eckankar history? Bill Schnoebelen was an eckist according to this article. The other two appear to be writers."
                  >
                  > ME: Doug Marman is an old
                  > friend of Klemp's who's an
                  > apologist for Eckankar. I think
                  > he's a 7th. He's got some books
                  > out there that have overlooked
                  > many facts and are based upon
                  > lies and hearsay. What's funny,
                  > however, is that Doug's stated
                  > that Twitchell lied about traveling
                  > to Paris, France to visit his sister
                  > when it was, actually, Paris, Kentucky.
                  > And, Marman's stated that Rebazar
                  > was probably made up by Twitchell.
                  > After all, PT needed to have
                  > someone other than Kirpal Singh,
                  > his real master, initiate him.
                  > Thus, PT created RT in order to
                  > initiate himself. Plus, Marman
                  > has admitted that Twitchell
                  > created the Mahanta title in
                  > January 1969. Yet, Marman
                  > omits all of this information
                  > in his books!
                  >
                  > "Telling my experience wasn't easy for me. Although I tend to be a private person, I felt a need to write it.
                  >
                  > Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus.
                  >
                  > May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful spiritual experiences."
                  >
                  > ME: Thanks for sharing this.
                  > It was interesting for me to
                  > comment.
                  >
                  >
                  > prometheus wrote:
                  >
                  > This is an entertaining approach.
                  >
                  > http://www.scribd.com/doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson
                  >
                  > Prometheus
                  >

                • prometheus_973
                  Hello All, What I found interesting is that Klemp mentions Kirpal s name 15 times and Sudar s name 4 times. Just check the Twitchell info on Eckankar.org and
                  Message 8 of 14 , May 9, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello All,
                    What I found interesting
                    is that Klemp mentions
                    Kirpal's name 15 times
                    and Sudar's name 4 times.

                    Just check the Twitchell
                    info on Eckankar.org and
                    count it up for yourselves.
                    HK mentions that Twit had
                    a falling out with Kirpal
                    (for some unknown reason)
                    and that Kirpal had possession
                    of Paul's "The Tiger's Fang"
                    manuscript which he, later,
                    returned circa June, 1966.

                    The "falling out" was because
                    Paul had "exaggerated" and
                    "twisted facts" as Klemp states
                    Twit had done at age 27 (1935)
                    to get into Who's Who in Kentucky.

                    Even though the Tiger's Fang
                    story made Kirpal (aka Rebazar,
                    et al.) appear to be a great master,
                    it also made Paul look like a
                    Master as well. PT was using
                    Kirpal to self-promote himself
                    and Kirpal was aware of Paul's
                    scam to place himself on a
                    plane of consciousness near
                    Kirpal's!

                    Think about this. Would Klemp
                    allow similar stories to be published
                    in EK Newsletters that would
                    place low level EKists on these
                    Higher Planes? Never! Klemp
                    would see it as a challenge to
                    his authority just as Kirpal did.

                    It's obvious that Kirpal Singh
                    was Paul's true master and
                    not Sudar Singh.

                    What's this mean?

                    Well, it means that Paul
                    lied and there are EK books
                    that perpetuate this same
                    lie.

                    It also means that Sudar
                    never existed. Thus, Paul
                    was never initiated by Sudar
                    into ECKankar. If anything,
                    Paul was initiated into Radhasoami
                    by Kirpal Singh (btw- Radhasoami
                    is a sect of Ruhani Satsang).

                    And, this means that Eckankar
                    is, actually, a sect of the sect
                    of Radhasoami. Look at the
                    dogma! Eckankar's is practically
                    identical to Radhasoami and
                    to Ruhani Satsang. Sects, basically,
                    follow the same dogma of the
                    original teaching but tend
                    to do some tweaking due to
                    a falling out regarding leadership.

                    Regardless of tapes that Twit
                    made, after-the-fact and about
                    fake masters like Rebazar, we
                    still have the June, 1971 interviews
                    that Twit did for "Difficulties
                    Of Becoming The Living ECK Master."

                    What Paul lied about in June 1971
                    as the "Full" Mahanta (created in 1969)
                    is more important than what he said
                    earlier.

                    Plus, we have the Timelines which
                    show more of PT's lies.

                    And, we have Klemp, on Eckankar.org,
                    stating that Kirpal Singh had possession
                    of PT's "The Tiger's Fang" manuscript.
                    This was a manuscript... not a book!

                    Plus, we have Klemp stating that
                    Twitchell was a liar who "exaggerated"
                    and "twisted facts" along with several
                    on-going comments about Paul being
                    a (somewhat shameless) self-promoter.

                    The sum of these facts make it
                    almost impossible for any objective
                    person Not to be able to see the
                    truth and connect-the-dots and
                    know, without a reasonable doubt,
                    that Twitchell was a fake master,
                    plagiarist, and a conman.

                    Prometheus


                    Janice wrote:

                    Thank you etznab for clarifying.

                    Etznab wrote:

                    "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"

                    Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original links/threads for complete context.)

                    To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is still a long post though.

                    (1)

                    Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online book:

                    [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The Master.

                    The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicking the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today.

                    So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had ever heard anything about it before. He immediately became interested, told me that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I told Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes I was sorting through, but I would run home to get it for him. I immediately jumped up to head for my car.

                    It was at this point that Darwin said something that left me with a deep impression. He saw that I was hurrying toward my car in my desire to get the tape for him, and he said, "Take your time." He then paused, as if he was saying something very important, and he added, "There is never any reason to rush." [... .]

                    http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Nine.htm

                    (2)

                    July 2001:

                    "The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT my invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David Lane?]

                    Kirpal "thought" Twitchell was denying it. How interesting. Why doesn't David show us the rest of the quote, which explains why Kirpal thought that? Kirpal makes it very clear that he is referring to The Tiger's Fang, which in its first draft mentioned Kirpal as Paul's teacher, but was changed to Rebazar Tarzs by the time it was published in 1967. [....]" - [Doug Marman?]

                    http://tinyurl.com/4x3kl25

                    (3)

                    July 2003:

                    Interesting, Doug. I have mixed feeling about the "plagerism". For thos most part, I see the copied info as generally either common themes or insignificant fillers. However, I find the quotes where he claimed to have come from Rebazar to have been done in really poor taste... and perhaps not a great move in his part ???
                    What are your on that stuff ?
                    I agree with you that plagiarism is not the real issue. I think the fact that many felt The Far Country was a transcription of an actual dialog means this matter of plagiarism shows them a very different picture. It means the words really came from Paul's pen, with help from other authors, and not word for word from Rebazar Tarzs.
                    As for poor taste, I think it looks a lot differently now. I can look back at some of my early writings and see strong similarities with Paul's books. He influenced me significantly. Let's say I decided to leave ECKANKAR and start writing for some other teacher. Let's say I took some of my old writings and just re-worked them to fit with the new teachings. Now, somebody eventually sees that my writings are almost word for word from some of Paul's writings. Now it looks like I was "stealing" from ECKANKAR, and that the new teacher is just a spin-off.
                    It's all a matter of perspective.
                    I think Paul was clearly influenced by Johnson's books. He obviously liked them enough that he covered a lot of the same material, and even used very similar words in many cases, when he wrote The Far Country. However, he was also writing this at the same time as he handed Kirpal Singh his first draft of The Tiger's Fang. If Kirpal had not rejected his efforts, I believe Kirpal's students would have looked at The Far Country far differently.
                    On the other hand, I don't really know what Paul was thinking when he wrote this book. I do like The Far Country far more than Johnson's books, so I'm glad he wrote it. However, I do think that it is a serious negative to his popularity in the public sector. I'm not sure Paul would mind too much about that. - Doug.

                    http://tinyurl.com/7stz3vz

                    (4) February 2004:

                    "[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. [....]"

                    http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264

                    (5)

                    March 2007:

                    [...] Let me ask a question here: Do you have a problem seeing Paul's book, Stranger By the River, as a poetic work, rather than a factual account?
                    Do you think that Paul is quoting Rebazar's actual words there? Or is he trying to communicate the teaching that he learned from him?
                    I've noticed that a lot of ECKists readily accepted that Stranger By The River was a fictionalized piece, much like Khalil Gibran's works, but have taken The Far Country as something different.
                    So, yes, when you come to realize that The Far Country is a similar work of art, rather than a factual account, you might feel that somehow you were fooled. I've seen people go through this reaction, and then it becomes a trust issue for them.
                    I can relate to that. Although I always felt that The Far Country was much more like Stranger By The River. My reason: Paul is describing spiritual teachings here that are coming from a spiritual experience.
                    These aren't things that come in English. They are inner teachings. So, I always thought these were Paul's words and his creation, but that he was trying to describe something real in the best way that he could.
                    In other words, he was writing the classic "as if you were there" book, to leave the reader with the impression as close as possible to what it was really like. [...] Which do you think Paul was writing about? Was he trying to write about historical facts, or was he describing spiritual truth? If the later, wouldn't it be best to review his works in this light? Why worry if his facts are not exactly right?

                    http://tinyurl.com/7tuzbwd

                    --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer <jepfeiffer@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Prometheus,
                    > Â
                    > You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me. It gives me peace of mind to know that others did have them too. Thank you for being such a wise soul.
                    > Â
                    > Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why? The circus of eckankar is mind boggling. The more I hear from experienced eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand as an organization. It appears like a house of cards. Do you think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you think the org is losing ground? I have read they exaggerate their membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event. Any ideas?
                    > Â
                    > Thanks
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                    > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
                    > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                    > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Â
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Hello Janice and All,
                    > Interesting. I think I'll
                    > share some comments
                    > to your insights below.
                    >
                    > Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
                    > "Prometheus,
                    >
                    > Now that is very interesting.
                    >
                    > I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or so before I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't falling in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of energy. My experience was that I was just before falling asleep one night and I heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember later. I know it started with a P.
                    >
                    > Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind and then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but I was only half awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp. It was a strong male voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an ugly looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood gazing at me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed. In my dream I told it to get out now and never come back. It did.
                    >
                    > Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar as being a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the dreams were even more so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my favorite character. He seemed the most spiritual at the time. I found it very confusing to have these dreams.
                    >
                    > I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long term relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions that got me yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck teachings since becoming an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was true beauty in the teachings."
                    >
                    > ME (Prometheus): I know that
                    > many of us have had similar
                    > experiences of being attacked
                    > by negative entities and having
                    > to defend ourselves. In this case
                    > your RESA was, also, one of these
                    > negative beings. Too bad you
                    > couldn't protect yourself from
                    > them, but it's deceptive when
                    > one has placed trust in a RESA
                    > by assuming they are always
                    > positive and always on your side.
                    > They are as closed minded and
                    > defensive as is any religionist
                    > when protecting their dogma
                    > from too much scrutiny.
                    >
                    > "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how it attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading all the things I would not read as an eckist. It took me about another year to start feeling like a normal person. I must say that the attack seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of eckankar claim in theirs writings. It didn't appear to be a positive thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I wasn't conforming properly. I didn't insult people or even respond to them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many occasions when asked personal questions. Privacy doesn't seem to be respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories about the personal lives of other eckist."
                    >
                    > ME: Yes. One has to give-in and give-up.
                    > Some say, Let-go and Let-God. But, with
                    > ECKankar they will say to remain skeptical
                    > until you can "prove it" to yourself. But,
                    > the catch is that there's a time limit for
                    > being skeptical. True, when one seeks
                    > the "Truth" via introspection and uses
                    > meditation/contemplation one will change
                    > and see with new eyes, but that's not due
                    > to any fake Mahanta or borrowed and
                    > tweaked Sant Mat dogma. One will naturally
                    > dream and imagine all sorts of things
                    > when attention is placed upon these
                    > areas and topics. That's what Twitchell
                    > and every other conman knew and uses
                    > and what Klemp continues to use as
                    > a hook. It's a slight-of-hand deception
                    > the magician uses while the viewer's
                    > attention is distracted elsewhere.
                    >
                    >
                    > "I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with demons. I am not sure demons are real and separate entities. I have always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or demonic that threatens their views so if I read what they have to say, I dismiss a lot of it. If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't have a reason to exist. This article starts out like most religious hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature of eckankar."
                    >
                    > ME: I'm, also, not so sure that demons
                    > are real. It could very well be that demons
                    > are metaphors for those things that bother
                    > and bind us to negativity, fear, self-doubt
                    > and even to self-loathing. Actually, isn't
                    > all religious dogma full of hidden metaphors?
                    > This is where the fanatics and the fundamentalists
                    > have problems since they tend to pick and
                    > choose what is easy for them to believe
                    > since they tend to be more simple-minded
                    > and tend to see most everything in literal,
                    > narrow, terms.
                    >
                    >
                    > "I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master and he thinks he is doing a lot of good. I think he is just the puppet for the more scheming higher ups. I really don't s
                    > see anything really outstanding about klemp at all. That was my biggest problem with eckankar. When I would do the gazing at the mahanta thing using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly looking man. He even looked miserable. I saw no power. He wasn't charismatic. He wasn't very intelligent and he had no creative ability that I could see. He like twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources outside of eckankar for spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to me at times comical. As long as he was being told he was the great eck master, he probably was easily controlled by the gang of money hounds making up corporate eckankar."
                    >
                    > ME: Klemp is the Higher Up.
                    > He had the by-laws changed
                    > after he took over from D.G.
                    > and neither the President nor
                    > the EK Board has any voting
                    > authority. Only Klemp can hire
                    > and fire. The local Satsang
                    > Societies and local Boards have
                    > been set up the same (As Above).
                    > Thus, the RESAs can hire and
                    > fire the local Presidents and
                    > Board members and the votes
                    > of Board members carry no
                    > authority! The RESA has the
                    > sole authority, unless, a higher
                    > authority at the ESC steps in.
                    > However, when this is done
                    > it is always with the approval
                    > of Klemp and under his direction.
                    >
                    >
                    > "It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by twitchell and others that the average person would think is not spiritual. I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been removed from print."
                    >
                    > ME: "Difficulties Of Becoming The Living
                    > ECK Master" was the best book written
                    > depicting Twitchell's egomaniacal rants.
                    > There were three interviews done around
                    > June 1971 while PT was the full blown
                    > self-proclaimed Mahanta. What's amazing
                    > is that after all of these years he's still
                    > lying about his past. Klemp has stated
                    > on Eckankar.org that Twit was "exaggerating"
                    > and "twisting facts" to get into Kentucky's
                    > Who's Who and had never traveled all that
                    > far from home. Yet, Twitchell (in this June,
                    > 1971 interview), is saying he was almost
                    > 16 years old when he, first, went from
                    > Paris to India, with his sister, to be with
                    > Sudar Singh. There are more examples
                    > that are even more outlandish. Paul's
                    > comments about how he confused things
                    > and screwed up paperwork so that he
                    > could take it easy during the start of
                    > WWII showed a level of subversion and
                    > sabotage that even the Nazis couldn't
                    > accomplish!
                    >
                    > "I've never talked about the experience before because I found it so confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little bit nuts to even have those things. Any feed back from more knowledgeable eckist would be greatly appreciated. I don't know about demons but it was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking the chains of eckankar for me. They need more slaves to bring in recruits for more money and more influence. I wasn't doing that. I am thankful that although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did not drag a single soul into eckankar. Well, not that I know of anyway. Guess I wasn't a very good eckiest. I wasn't capable of it and I am ashamed of myself for ever being a member. Coming out of it, I think most people feel dumb, gullible and used."
                    >
                    > ME: I think that we all have to get
                    > over the guilt and shame of being
                    > tricked. Look at all of those who
                    > belong to a religion and donate
                    > time and money in order to get
                    > their "feel good" fix. Religions
                    > are types of opiates... Eckankar
                    > too! People need to believe in
                    > something that can give them
                    > hope and to help them to maintain
                    > a positive outlook. And, conmen
                    > know what people want and need.
                    > Attitude is, also, important but
                    > there's a fine line between being
                    > positive and being delusional.
                    > Sometimes it's difficult to know
                    > where to draw the line and some
                    > of us have more difficulty with
                    > seeing the good versus seeing
                    > the bad. However, I don't think
                    > that seeing the glass half-empty
                    > is always wrong, but it does present
                    > more of a challenge to overcome.
                    >
                    > "Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't healthy. I am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems. Some of them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot. Anyway, I was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe mental conditions previously or since becoming eckist. But why couldn't this great living eck master help them over come these things or at least help them adjust better to the physical world? If the living eck master had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being? Why does klemp describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in public? Not in my opinion anyway. Is it because after being proclaimed the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was woven into a spiritual experience as kind of a necessary
                    > ordeal? Did he go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in twitchells shoes and he mentally duplicated twithells experience?"
                    >
                    > ME: I don't believe that Twitchell
                    > ever needed to jump off a bridge
                    > and do a strip tease at an airport
                    > and choose jail or a mental institution
                    > in order to "find God." Besides, Twit
                    > was a liar up to the moment of his
                    > untimely death and, thus, was not
                    > a "spiritual being." It was all about
                    > him. Besides, many people have
                    > done stupid things when confused
                    > with life and have sought "spiritual
                    > solutions." If one chose to, one could
                    > claim that their mental missteps
                    > and episodes were "spiritual
                    > experiences" as Klemp has done.
                    > Klemp is merely doing a 20/20
                    > hindsight, and PR rewrite, to
                    > excuse his mental confusion.
                    > After all, HK's the leader of a
                    > church and has to be above
                    > and beyond reproach. It's a
                    > pretend game where he has
                    > to, partially, buy into the hype
                    > in order to seem authentic.
                    >
                    > "I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and who appeared to be warm caring human beings. Some appeared to be well adjusted people. Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving. Maybe it is possible to grow in eckankar."
                    >
                    > ME: I, too, know and remember some
                    > H.I.s whom I like. They are nice people...
                    > as long as they don't know who I am.
                    > That could/would change I'm sure.
                    > They would feel betrayed and insulted
                    > and I could understand that, however,
                    > that, too, would be a "spiritual" test!
                    > To "grow in eckankar?" Sure, but it's
                    > not due to Eckankar or because of
                    > inner guidance by a fake mahanta.
                    > That crap just gets in the way and
                    > causes more codependency. Any
                    > growth or realization leading to
                    > an expanded awareness is learned
                    > and earned by the individual. It's
                    > their own personal and private
                    > relationship to the Holy Spirit or
                    > whatever one wants to call this
                    > divine essence, or not, that leads
                    > to a divine knowingness and to
                    > contentment!
                    >
                    > "I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings came from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several high initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed relevant at the time. One female told me, you take the parts you can use and toss the rest. I guess the idea was that with the teachings being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which ones to keep. Also, if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as needed. Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person. Lies should not be knowingly condoned."
                    >
                    > ME: Actually, accepting Eckankar
                    > while knowing about the deceptions
                    > and lies is rationalizing. It's like,
                    > if it's not broke why fix it? Or,
                    > why throw the baby out with the
                    > (dirty) bath water? Nothing, and
                    > nobody (Klemp), in the lower worlds
                    > of KAL is perfect. Thus, if it (Eckankar)
                    > works why complain? H.I.s have
                    > put blinders on in order to stay
                    > the course and maintain their
                    > prestigious positions which took
                    > them decades of time and money
                    > to obtain. Many have rejected, in
                    > part, HK's RESA structure and the
                    > ESA Guidelines. Yes, I knew of H.I.s
                    > that did the same... picked and
                    > chose what they wanted to follow
                    > and believe. However, that's not
                    > the way Eckankar is supposed to
                    > work. One is supposed to take
                    > the bait and swallow it hook, line,
                    > and sinker! Twit, supposedly, took
                    > only the best from all of the other
                    > religions and experts, etc. in order
                    > to create (or bring forth) the EK
                    > dogma to the modern Western
                    > world. Thus, how can one pick
                    > and chose when it's all, supposedly,
                    > relevant? If a person is not consciously
                    > following the guidance and the will
                    > of the LEM/Mahanta (Klemp), then,
                    > they are heretics!
                    >
                    > "I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other than eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as greater than anything else. They are under the eckankar spell. I still wouldn't want contact with them though. I just couldn't listen that eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel for them. It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them. So, I just remember the good and bless them in my heart."
                    >
                    > ME: True! It's nice to belong.
                    > Humans are social animals
                    > and most like to follow in
                    > one way or another because
                    > it's easier to follow than to
                    > lead. Being a follower requires
                    > less thought and energy. It's
                    > less demanding, less consuming,
                    > and is less stressful. It is true
                    > that the Higher one is with
                    > initiations, years, and titles
                    > the more lost that individual
                    > is. They've bought into it
                    > to the extreme. Look at Marge
                    > Klemp! However, the ones
                    > to really feel sorry for are those
                    > ESC staffers who know it's all
                    > a sham and Klemp is a poser,
                    > but they have to put on an act
                    > in order to keep their jobs,
                    > health care, retirement, etc.
                    >
                    >
                    > "Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar with. I will look them up but any info any of you can share would be appreciated. Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh? Are these really old names in eckankar history? Bill Schnoebelen was an eckist according to this article. The other two appear to be writers."
                    >
                    > ME: Doug Marman is an old
                    > friend of Klemp's who's an
                    > apologist for Eckankar. I think
                    > he's a 7th. He's got some books
                    > out there that have overlooked
                    > many facts and are based upon
                    > lies and hearsay. What's funny,
                    > however, is that Doug's stated
                    > that Twitchell lied about traveling
                    > to Paris, France to visit his sister
                    > when it was, actually, Paris, Kentucky.
                    > And, Marman's stated that Rebazar
                    > was probably made up by Twitchell.
                    > After all, PT needed to have
                    > someone other than Kirpal Singh,
                    > his real master, initiate him.
                    > Thus, PT created RT in order to
                    > initiate himself. Plus, Marman
                    > has admitted that Twitchell
                    > created the Mahanta title in
                    > January 1969. Yet, Marman
                    > omits all of this information
                    > in his books!
                    >
                    > "Telling my experience wasn't easy for me. Although I tend to be a private person, I felt a need to write it.
                    >
                    > Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus.
                    >
                    > May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful spiritual experiences."
                    >
                    > ME: Thanks for sharing this.
                    > It was interesting for me to
                    > comment.
                    >
                    >
                    > prometheus wrote:
                    >
                    > This is an entertaining approach.
                    >
                    > http://www.scribd.com/doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson
                    >
                    > Prometheus
                  • etznab@aol.com
                    Nice post there. Lots of good points. Thanks. ... From: prometheus_973 To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
                    Message 9 of 14 , May 10, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Nice post there. Lots of good points. Thanks.

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
                      <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Wed, May 9, 2012 12:48 pm
                      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
                      (Revisited)

                       
                      Hello All,
                      What I found interesting
                      is that Klemp mentions
                      Kirpal's name 15 times
                      and Sudar's name 4 times.

                      Just check the Twitchell
                      info on Eckankar.org and
                      count it up for yourselves.
                      HK mentions that Twit had
                      a falling out with Kirpal
                      (for some unknown reason)
                      and that Kirpal had possession
                      of Paul's "The Tiger's Fang"
                      manuscript which he, later,
                      returned circa June, 1966.

                      The "falling out" was because
                      Paul had "exaggerated" and
                      "twisted facts" as Klemp states
                      Twit had done at age 27 (1935)
                      to get into Who's Who in Kentucky.

                      Even though the Tiger's Fang
                      story made Kirpal (aka Rebazar,
                      et al.) appear to be a great master,
                      it also made Paul look like a
                      Master as well. PT was using
                      Kirpal to self-promote himself
                      and Kirpal was aware of Paul's
                      scam to place himself on a
                      plane of consciousness near
                      Kirpal's!

                      Think about this. Would Klemp
                      allow similar stories to be published
                      in EK Newsletters that would
                      place low level EKists on these
                      Higher Planes? Never! Klemp
                      would see it as a challenge to
                      his authority just as Kirpal did.

                      It's obvious that Kirpal Singh
                      was Paul's true master and
                      not Sudar Singh.

                      What's this mean?

                      Well, it means that Paul
                      lied and there are EK books
                      that perpetuate this same
                      lie.

                      It also means that Sudar
                      never existed. Thus, Paul
                      was never initiated by Sudar
                      into ECKankar. If anything,
                      Paul was initiated into Radhasoami
                      by Kirpal Singh (btw- Radhasoami
                      is a sect of Ruhani Satsang).

                      And, this means that Eckankar
                      is, actually, a sect of the sect
                      of Radhasoami. Look at the
                      dogma! Eckankar's is practically
                      identical to Radhasoami and
                      to Ruhani Satsang. Sects, basically,
                      follow the same dogma of the
                      original teaching but tend
                      to do some tweaking due to
                      a falling out regarding leadership.

                      Regardless of tapes that Twit
                      made, after-the-fact and about
                      fake masters like Rebazar, we
                      still have the June, 1971 interviews
                      that Twit did for "Difficulties
                      Of Becoming The Living ECK Master."

                      What Paul lied about in June 1971
                      as the "Full" Mahanta (created in 1969)
                      is more important than what he said
                      earlier.

                      Plus, we have the Timelines which
                      show more of PT's lies.

                      And, we have Klemp, on Eckankar.org,
                      stating that Kirpal Singh had possession
                      of PT's "The Tiger's Fang" manuscript.
                      This was a manuscript... not a book!

                      Plus, we have Klemp stating that
                      Twitchell was a liar who "exaggerated"
                      and "twisted facts" along with several
                      on-going comments about Paul being
                      a (somewhat shameless) self-promoter.

                      The sum of these facts make it
                      almost impossible for any objective
                      person Not to be able to see the
                      truth and connect-the-dots and
                      know, without a reasonable doubt,
                      that Twitchell was a fake master,
                      plagiarist, and a conman.

                      Prometheus

                      Janice wrote:

                      Thank you etznab for clarifying.

                      Etznab wrote:

                      "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman
                      admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"

                      Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original links/threads for
                      complete context.)

                      To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is
                      still a long post though.

                      (1)

                      Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online book:

                      [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my
                      self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day
                      I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in
                      the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his
                      home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was
                      trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The
                      Master.

                      The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs.
                      Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely sound, saying
                      something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicking the
                      voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from
                      Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I can't remember
                      much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and I wish I could
                      hear it again to see what I might think of it today.

                      So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had ever heard
                      anything about it before. He immediately became interested, told me
                      that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I told
                      Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes I
                      was sorting through, but I would run home to get it for him. I
                      immediately jumped up to head for my car.

                      It was at this point that Darwin said something that left me with a
                      deep impression. He saw that I was hurrying toward my car in my desire
                      to get the tape for him, and he said, "Take your time." He then paused,
                      as if he was saying something very important, and he added, "There is
                      never any reason to rush." [... .]

                      http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Nine.htm

                      (2)

                      July 2001:

                      "The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT
                      my invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David
                      Lane?]

                      Kirpal "thought" Twitchell was denying it. How interesting. Why doesn't
                      David show us the rest of the quote, which explains why Kirpal thought
                      that? Kirpal makes it very clear that he is referring to The Tiger's
                      Fang, which in its first draft mentioned Kirpal as Paul's teacher, but
                      was changed to Rebazar Tarzs by the time it was published in 1967.
                      [....]" - [Doug Marman?]

                      http://tinyurl.com/4x3kl25

                      (3)

                      July 2003:

                      Interesting, Doug. I have mixed feeling about the "plagerism". For thos
                      most part, I see the copied info as generally either common themes or
                      insignificant fillers. However, I find the quotes where he claimed to
                      have come from Rebazar to have been done in really poor taste... and
                      perhaps not a great move in his part ???
                      What are your on that stuff ?
                      I agree with you that plagiarism is not the real issue. I think the
                      fact that many felt The Far Country was a transcription of an actual
                      dialog means this matter of plagiarism shows them a very different
                      picture. It means the words really came from Paul's pen, with help from
                      other authors, and not word for word from Rebazar Tarzs.
                      As for poor taste, I think it looks a lot differently now. I can look
                      back at some of my early writings and see strong similarities with
                      Paul's books. He influenced me significantly. Let's say I decided to
                      leave ECKANKAR and start writing for some other teacher. Let's say I
                      took some of my old writings and just re-worked them to fit with the
                      new teachings. Now, somebody eventually sees that my writings are
                      almost word for word from some of Paul's writings. Now it looks like I
                      was "stealing" from ECKANKAR, and that the new teacher is just a
                      spin-off.
                      It's all a matter of perspective.
                      I think Paul was clearly influenced by Johnson's books. He obviously
                      liked them enough that he covered a lot of the same material, and even
                      used very similar words in many cases, when he wrote The Far Country.
                      However, he was also writing this at the same time as he handed Kirpal
                      Singh his first draft of The Tiger's Fang. If Kirpal had not rejected
                      his efforts, I believe Kirpal's students would have looked at The Far
                      Country far differently.
                      On the other hand, I don't really know what Paul was thinking when he
                      wrote this book. I do like The Far Country far more than Johnson's
                      books, so I'm glad he wrote it. However, I do think that it is a
                      serious negative to his popularity in the public sector. I'm not sure
                      Paul would mind too much about that. - Doug.

                      http://tinyurl.com/7stz3vz

                      (4) February 2004:

                      "[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I
                      guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use
                      other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck
                      Master were saying them? Yes. [....]"

                      http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264

                      (5)

                      March 2007:

                      [...] Let me ask a question here: Do you have a problem seeing Paul's
                      book, Stranger By the River, as a poetic work, rather than a factual
                      account?
                      Do you think that Paul is quoting Rebazar's actual words there? Or is
                      he trying to communicate the teaching that he learned from him?
                      I've noticed that a lot of ECKists readily accepted that Stranger By
                      The River was a fictionalized piece, much like Khalil Gibran's works,
                      but have taken The Far Country as something different.
                      So, yes, when you come to realize that The Far Country is a similar
                      work of art, rather than a factual account, you might feel that somehow
                      you were fooled. I've seen people go through this reaction, and then it
                      becomes a trust issue for them.
                      I can relate to that. Although I always felt that The Far Country was
                      much more like Stranger By The River. My reason: Paul is describing
                      spiritual teachings here that are coming from a spiritual experience.
                      These aren't things that come in English. They are inner teachings. So,
                      I always thought these were Paul's words and his creation, but that he
                      was trying to describe something real in the best way that he could.
                      In other words, he was writing the classic "as if you were there" book,
                      to leave the reader with the impression as close as possible to what it
                      was really like. [...] Which do you think Paul was writing about? Was
                      he trying to write about historical facts, or was he describing
                      spiritual truth? If the later, wouldn't it be best to review his works
                      in this light? Why worry if his facts are not exactly right?

                      http://tinyurl.com/7tuzbwd

                      --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, Janice Pfeiffer
                      <jepfeiffer@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Prometheus,
                      > Â
                      > You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me. It
                      gives me peace of mind to know that others did have them too. Thank
                      you for being such a wise soul.
                      > Â
                      > Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman
                      admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and
                      why? The circus of eckankar is mind boggling. The more I hear
                      from experienced eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand
                      as an organization. It appears like a house of cards. Do you
                      think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you
                      think the org is losing ground? I have read they exaggerate their
                      membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event.Â
                      Any ideas?
                      > Â
                      > Thanks
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                      > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of
                      ECKankar (Revisited)
                      > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                      > Date: Thursday, May 3, 2012, 7:33 PM
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Â
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Hello Janice and All,
                      > Interesting. I think I'll
                      > share some comments
                      > to your insights below.
                      >
                      > Janice Pfeiffer wrote:
                      > "Prometheus,
                      >
                      > Now that is very interesting.
                      >
                      > I, myself, felt I suffered some kind of an attack about a year or
                      so before I got out. I believe it happened because I just wasn't
                      falling in line like a good little eckist but maybe I was robbed of
                      energy. My experience was that I was just before falling asleep one
                      night and I heard a loud voice which used a word I couldn't remember
                      later. I know it started with a P.
                      >
                      > Anyway, as this word was being shouted, I got a jolt of some kind
                      and then I felt a wave of nausea and weakness. This wasn't a dream but
                      I was only half awake. The voice I heard wasn't wimpy sounding klemp.
                      It was a strong male voice. A few nights later, I did dream that an
                      ugly looking little troll like figure came into my room and stood
                      gazing at me through the metal barks on the foot board of my bed. In my
                      dream I told it to get out now and never come back. It did.
                      >
                      > Then I started having dreams that portrayed the eck master rebazar
                      as being a thief and a con artist. The experience was weird and the
                      dreams were even more so. While an early eckist, I guess rebazar was my
                      favorite character. He seemed the most spiritual at the time. I found
                      it very confusing to have these dreams.
                      >
                      > I began to realize how stale my life had become. I was in a long
                      term relationship with a high initiate. I started asking the questions
                      that got me yelled at by the area resa. I had read nothing but eck
                      teachings since becoming an eckist. I thought while an ekist there was
                      true beauty in the teachings."
                      >
                      > ME (Prometheus): I know that
                      > many of us have had similar
                      > experiences of being attacked
                      > by negative entities and having
                      > to defend ourselves. In this case
                      > your RESA was, also, one of these
                      > negative beings. Too bad you
                      > couldn't protect yourself from
                      > them, but it's deceptive when
                      > one has placed trust in a RESA
                      > by assuming they are always
                      > positive and always on your side.
                      > They are as closed minded and
                      > defensive as is any religionist
                      > when protecting their dogma
                      > from too much scrutiny.
                      >
                      > "And so I began to see eckankar with all its manipulation and how
                      it attempts to break a person down. I walked away and I started reading
                      all the things I would not read as an eckist. It took me about another
                      year to start feeling like a normal person. I must say that the attack
                      seemed to be aimed at my brain and not my heart as these great ones of
                      eckankar claim in theirs writings. It didn't appear to be a positive
                      thing and I wondered if an attempt had been made to harm me since I
                      wasn't conforming properly. I didn't insult people or even respond to
                      them with rudeness but I did maintain my right to privacy on many
                      occasions when asked personal questions. Privacy doesn't seem to be
                      respected in eckankar and a lot of eckist were usually telling stories
                      about the personal lives of other eckist."
                      >
                      > ME: Yes. One has to give-in and give-up.
                      > Some say, Let-go and Let-God. But, with
                      > ECKankar they will say to remain skeptical
                      > until you can "prove it" to yourself. But,
                      > the catch is that there's a time limit for
                      > being skeptical. True, when one seeks
                      > the "Truth" via introspection and uses
                      > meditation/contemplation one will change
                      > and see with new eyes, but that's not due
                      > to any fake Mahanta or borrowed and
                      > tweaked Sant Mat dogma. One will naturally
                      > dream and imagine all sorts of things
                      > when attention is placed upon these
                      > areas and topics. That's what Twitchell
                      > and every other conman knew and uses
                      > and what Klemp continues to use as
                      > a hook. It's a slight-of-hand deception
                      > the magician uses while the viewer's
                      > attention is distracted elsewhere.
                      >
                      >
                      > "I think some higher part of me was showing me the truth behind
                      eckankar after the attack but I never associated the experience with
                      demons. I am not sure demons are real and separate entities. I have
                      always felt that a lot of Christians will declare anything evil or
                      demonic that threatens their views so if I read what they have to say,
                      I dismiss a lot of it. If evil didn't exist then Christianity wouldn't
                      have a reason to exist. This article starts out like most religious
                      hipe but they did make a few good points about the destructive nature
                      of eckankar."
                      >
                      > ME: I'm, also, not so sure that demons
                      > are real. It could very well be that demons
                      > are metaphors for those things that bother
                      > and bind us to negativity, fear, self-doubt
                      > and even to self-loathing. Actually, isn't
                      > all religious dogma full of hidden metaphors?
                      > This is where the fanatics and the fundamentalists
                      > have problems since they tend to pick and
                      > choose what is easy for them to believe
                      > since they tend to be more simple-minded
                      > and tend to see most everything in literal,
                      > narrow, terms.
                      >
                      >
                      > "I honestly believe that klemp thinks he is the living eck master
                      and he thinks he is doing a lot of good. I think he is just the puppet
                      for the more scheming higher ups. I really don't s
                      > see anything really outstanding about klemp at all. That was my
                      biggest problem with eckankar. When I would do the gazing at the
                      mahanta thing using klemps picture, all I could see was a sickly
                      looking man. He even looked miserable. I saw no power. He wasn't
                      charismatic. He wasn't very intelligent and he had no creative ability
                      that I could see. He like twitchell seemed to need to draw from sources
                      outside of eckankar for spiritual inspiration and his attempts were to
                      me at times comical. As long as he was being told he was the great eck
                      master, he probably was easily controlled by the gang of money hounds
                      making up corporate eckankar."
                      >
                      > ME: Klemp is the Higher Up.
                      > He had the by-laws changed
                      > after he took over from D.G.
                      > and neither the President nor
                      > the EK Board has any voting
                      > authority. Only Klemp can hire
                      > and fire. The local Satsang
                      > Societies and local Boards have
                      > been set up the same (As Above).
                      > Thus, the RESAs can hire and
                      > fire the local Presidents and
                      > Board members and the votes
                      > of Board members carry no
                      > authority! The RESA has the
                      > sole authority, unless, a higher
                      > authority at the ESC steps in.
                      > However, when this is done
                      > it is always with the approval
                      > of Klemp and under his direction.
                      >
                      >
                      > "It is true that eckankar gets rid of things that were written by
                      twitchell and others that the average person would think is not
                      spiritual. I never heard of twitchells written rantings about his great
                      power and influence so by the time I was in, I guess it had been
                      removed from print."
                      >
                      > ME: "Difficulties Of Becoming The Living
                      > ECK Master" was the best book written
                      > depicting Twitchell's egomaniacal rants.
                      > There were three interviews done around
                      > June 1971 while PT was the full blown
                      > self-proclaimed Mahanta. What's amazing
                      > is that after all of these years he's still
                      > lying about his past. Klemp has stated
                      > on Eckankar.org that Twit was "exaggerating"
                      > and "twisting facts" to get into Kentucky's
                      > Who's Who and had never traveled all that
                      > far from home. Yet, Twitchell (in this June,
                      > 1971 interview), is saying he was almost
                      > 16 years old when he, first, went from
                      > Paris to India, with his sister, to be with
                      > Sudar Singh. There are more examples
                      > that are even more outlandish. Paul's
                      > comments about how he confused things
                      > and screwed up paperwork so that he
                      > could take it easy during the start of
                      > WWII showed a level of subversion and
                      > sabotage that even the Nazis couldn't
                      > accomplish!
                      >
                      > "I've never talked about the experience before because I found it
                      so confusing and during that time, I wondered if I had gotten a little
                      bit nuts to even have those things. Any feed back from more
                      knowledgeable eckist would be greatly appreciated. I don't know about
                      demons but it was strange and enough to cause the process of breaking
                      the chains of eckankar for me. They need more slaves to bring in
                      recruits for more money and more influence. I wasn't doing that. I am
                      thankful that although I did perform tasks for the local area, I did
                      not drag a single soul into eckankar. Well, not that I know of anyway.
                      Guess I wasn't a very good eckiest. I wasn't capable of it and I am
                      ashamed of myself for ever being a member. Coming out of it, I think
                      most people feel dumb, gullible and used."
                      >
                      > ME: I think that we all have to get
                      > over the guilt and shame of being
                      > tricked. Look at all of those who
                      > belong to a religion and donate
                      > time and money in order to get
                      > their "feel good" fix. Religions
                      > are types of opiates... Eckankar
                      > too! People need to believe in
                      > something that can give them
                      > hope and to help them to maintain
                      > a positive outlook. And, conmen
                      > know what people want and need.
                      > Attitude is, also, important but
                      > there's a fine line between being
                      > positive and being delusional.
                      > Sometimes it's difficult to know
                      > where to draw the line and some
                      > of us have more difficulty with
                      > seeing the good versus seeing
                      > the bad. However, I don't think
                      > that seeing the glass half-empty
                      > is always wrong, but it does present
                      > more of a challenge to overcome.
                      >
                      > "Something else kind of made me realize that eckankar wasn't
                      healthy. I am by no means saying that all eckist have mental problems.
                      Some of them had a great need to talk to some one. I listened a lot.
                      Anyway, I was told by some eckist that they were diagnosed with severe
                      mental conditions previously or since becoming eckist. But why couldn't
                      this great living eck master help them over come these things or at
                      least help them adjust better to the physical world? If the living eck
                      master had to go nuts to find his spiritual power does that mean it is
                      necessary to become a spiritually enlightened being? Why does klemp
                      describe his psychotic episode as something spiritual, when no one with
                      a sound mind or high spiritual powers, would remove their clothes in
                      public? Not in my opinion anyway. Is it because after being proclaimed
                      the living eck master, it might be revealed by the media and so it was
                      woven into a spiritual experience as kind of a necessary
                      > ordeal? Did he go psychotic because he was attempting to follow in
                      twitchells shoes and he mentally duplicated twithells experience?"
                      >
                      > ME: I don't believe that Twitchell
                      > ever needed to jump off a bridge
                      > and do a strip tease at an airport
                      > and choose jail or a mental institution
                      > in order to "find God." Besides, Twit
                      > was a liar up to the moment of his
                      > untimely death and, thus, was not
                      > a "spiritual being." It was all about
                      > him. Besides, many people have
                      > done stupid things when confused
                      > with life and have sought "spiritual
                      > solutions." If one chose to, one could
                      > claim that their mental missteps
                      > and episodes were "spiritual
                      > experiences" as Klemp has done.
                      > Klemp is merely doing a 20/20
                      > hindsight, and PR rewrite, to
                      > excuse his mental confusion.
                      > After all, HK's the leader of a
                      > church and has to be above
                      > and beyond reproach. It's a
                      > pretend game where he has
                      > to, partially, buy into the hype
                      > in order to seem authentic.
                      >
                      > "I did meet some eckist that I still remember with fondness and
                      who appeared to be warm caring human beings. Some appeared to be well
                      adjusted people. Also, I just read a posting by an eckist on this
                      article that sounded remarkably insightful and loving. Maybe it is
                      possible to grow in eckankar."
                      >
                      > ME: I, too, know and remember some
                      > H.I.s whom I like. They are nice people...
                      > as long as they don't know who I am.
                      > That could/would change I'm sure.
                      > They would feel betrayed and insulted
                      > and I could understand that, however,
                      > that, too, would be a "spiritual" test!
                      > To "grow in eckankar?" Sure, but it's
                      > not due to Eckankar or because of
                      > inner guidance by a fake mahanta.
                      > That crap just gets in the way and
                      > causes more codependency. Any
                      > growth or realization leading to
                      > an expanded awareness is learned
                      > and earned by the individual. It's
                      > their own personal and private
                      > relationship to the Holy Spirit or
                      > whatever one wants to call this
                      > divine essence, or not, that leads
                      > to a divine knowingness and to
                      > contentment!
                      >
                      > "I had one eckist tell me that he didn't care where the teachings
                      came from because they worked for him. I had conversations with several
                      high initiates who were aware of the deception in eckankar and simply
                      accepted it without any attempts to rationalize it. It appeared that
                      the only truth that did exist for a lot of them was what ever seemed
                      relevant at the time. One female told me, you take the parts you can
                      use and toss the rest. I guess the idea was that with the teachings
                      being so vast, it was up to a person to decide for themselves which
                      ones to keep. Also, if twitchell made a habit of lying then truth
                      wasn't anything concrete at all but something to be manipulated as
                      needed. Well, that is what I got any from conversations. I think this
                      concept corrodes the moral fiber of a person. Lies should not be
                      knowingly condoned."
                      >
                      > ME: Actually, accepting Eckankar
                      > while knowing about the deceptions
                      > and lies is rationalizing. It's like,
                      > if it's not broke why fix it? Or,
                      > why throw the baby out with the
                      > (dirty) bath water? Nothing, and
                      > nobody (Klemp), in the lower worlds
                      > of KAL is perfect. Thus, if it (Eckankar)
                      > works why complain? H.I.s have
                      > put blinders on in order to stay
                      > the course and maintain their
                      > prestigious positions which took
                      > them decades of time and money
                      > to obtain. Many have rejected, in
                      > part, HK's RESA structure and the
                      > ESA Guidelines. Yes, I knew of H.I.s
                      > that did the same... picked and
                      > chose what they wanted to follow
                      > and believe. However, that's not
                      > the way Eckankar is supposed to
                      > work. One is supposed to take
                      > the bait and swallow it hook, line,
                      > and sinker! Twit, supposedly, took
                      > only the best from all of the other
                      > religions and experts, etc. in order
                      > to create (or bring forth) the EK
                      > dogma to the modern Western
                      > world. Thus, how can one pick
                      > and chose when it's all, supposedly,
                      > relevant? If a person is not consciously
                      > following the guidance and the will
                      > of the LEM/Mahanta (Klemp), then,
                      > they are heretics!
                      >
                      > "I just believe the good people just refused to see anything other
                      than eckankar because they needed to belong to something they view as
                      greater than anything else. They are under the eckankar spell. I still
                      wouldn't want contact with them though. I just couldn't listen that
                      eckankar dribble ever again and I would have to show how sorry I feel
                      for them. It would serve no healthy purpose for me or them. So, I just
                      remember the good and bless them in my heart."
                      >
                      > ME: True! It's nice to belong.
                      > Humans are social animals
                      > and most like to follow in
                      > one way or another because
                      > it's easier to follow than to
                      > lead. Being a follower requires
                      > less thought and energy. It's
                      > less demanding, less consuming,
                      > and is less stressful. It is true
                      > that the Higher one is with
                      > initiations, years, and titles
                      > the more lost that individual
                      > is. They've bought into it
                      > to the extreme. Look at Marge
                      > Klemp! However, the ones
                      > to really feel sorry for are those
                      > ESC staffers who know it's all
                      > a sham and Klemp is a poser,
                      > but they have to put on an act
                      > in order to keep their jobs,
                      > health care, retirement, etc.
                      >
                      >
                      > "Anyway, this article named a few people that I am not familiar
                      with. I will look them up but any info any of you can share would be
                      appreciated. Who is Dave Marman, Bill Schnoebelen and Robert Marsh? Are
                      these really old names in eckankar history? Bill Schnoebelen was an
                      eckist according to this article. The other two appear to be writers."
                      >
                      > ME: Doug Marman is an old
                      > friend of Klemp's who's an
                      > apologist for Eckankar. I think
                      > he's a 7th. He's got some books
                      > out there that have overlooked
                      > many facts and are based upon
                      > lies and hearsay. What's funny,
                      > however, is that Doug's stated
                      > that Twitchell lied about traveling
                      > to Paris, France to visit his sister
                      > when it was, actually, Paris, Kentucky.
                      > And, Marman's stated that Rebazar
                      > was probably made up by Twitchell.
                      > After all, PT needed to have
                      > someone other than Kirpal Singh,
                      > his real master, initiate him.
                      > Thus, PT created RT in order to
                      > initiate himself. Plus, Marman
                      > has admitted that Twitchell
                      > created the Mahanta title in
                      > January 1969. Yet, Marman
                      > omits all of this information
                      > in his books!
                      >
                      > "Telling my experience wasn't easy for me. Although I tend to be a
                      private person, I felt a need to write it.
                      >
                      > Thanks for giving me the opportunity Prometheus.
                      >
                      > May you all be blessed with good things especially fruitful
                      spiritual experiences."
                      >
                      > ME: Thanks for sharing this.
                      > It was interesting for me to
                      > comment.
                      >
                      >
                      > prometheus wrote:
                      >
                      > This is an entertaining approach.
                      >
                      >
                      http://www.scribd.com/doc/8967961/The-DARK-SIDE-of-ECKANKAR-by-Ruth-and-Noah-Samuelson
                      >
                      > Prometheus
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.