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

Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited Once More)

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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.