Nice post there. Lots of good points. Thanks.
From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...
Sent: Wed, May 9, 2012 12:48 pm
Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
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
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
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
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.
Thank you etznab for clarifying.
"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
To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is
still a long post though.
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
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." [... .]
"The idea of Twitchell denying his association with Kirpal Singh is NOT
my invention. Kirpal Singh thought Twitchell was denying it. - [David
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?]
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
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.
(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. [....]"
[...] 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
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?
--- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
, Janice Pfeiffer
> You have no idea how comforting your comments are to me.Ã It
gives me peace of mind to know that others did have them too.Ã Thank
you for being such a wise soul.
> Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman
admitted that rebazar was imaginary?Ã To whom did he tell this and
why?Ã The circus of eckankar is mind boggling.Ã The more I hear
from experienced eckist, the harder it is to believe that it can stand
as an organization.Ã It appears like a house of cards.Ã Do you
think more people are becoming disenchanted with eckankar and do you
think the org is losing ground?Ã I haveÃ read they exaggerate their
membership by counting anyone who has ever attended an eck event.Ã
> From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
> Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of
> 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:
> 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
> 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
> "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
> "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
> 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
> ME: Thanks for sharing this.
> It was interesting for me to
> prometheus wrote:
> This is an entertaining approach.