you raise some excellent issues, and I like your comments as I was
asking myself some similar questions.
--- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
> Thanks for reposting this message by Ed Kusi from the HCS BB. Ed
> a great gift for expressing his insights and beliefs, and I always
> enjoy reading his posts. I believe he wrote this in response to
> present discussion topic posted on HCS: "The Narrow Path to God
> Realization Is an Individual Not a Group Phenomenon." The topic is
> an interesting one. I'm not sure how well other posters on Ford's
> have handled it, but Ed's post speaks out loud and clearly. : )
*** Ed Kusi is certainly a kind of "godsend" for HCS - one of the
few who knows about what he is writing and who has the gift to
express himself clearly.
> This state where the person is spiritually independent also shows
> their outer life. Genuinely enlightened ones have an aura of an
> almost melancholic aloneness about them. This is not a cold
> aloofness, for these people radiate love and warmth to all life.
> is rather the spiritual light/power waves radiating from them
> others sense and naturally makes them want to keep their distance.
> Such a person will also not struggle, wear masks, or use
> to get people to see how enlightened they are. These are the stock
> in trade of the fake pretenders. Instead, their light shine
> through and plainly for all to see.
> #### In this paragraph, I am a little confused. Why would others
> who sense the radiated love and warmth to all life of an
> enlightened one want to keep their distance from such a person? I
> would think there would be an attraction rather than keeping away
> from them. I do understand how people can be conned by the fake
> pretenders--i.e. Eckankar and other such groups. But why not be
> attracted to the real thing? Of course, a truly enlightened one
> would not take on a leadership role. thus this would be a key in
> recognizing a truly enlightened being. ####
**** I agree with you because I had about the same thoughts. And
again, I think it's difficult to express these issues with words.
Perhaps what Ed meant is something like "people gather around these
enlightened ones, and they also love people and love to be with
people. They love to have fun, but after all of that, and even
during all of that, they realise that they are always really alone
with the Alone."
> This increasing solitude and independence is evidence of the
> growing spiritually and becoming one with God, ALL THAT IS. He or
> she is taking on the chief characteristic of the ONE, which is
> aloneness. For the Alone is One and, and One is the Alone.
> ### I don't think I agree with this either. I think the alone with
> the Alone is apt on the inner, but I think on the outer, such an
> enlightened individual would not be standing in such solitude--
> however, his independence would be evident in that he would not be
> caught up in a group consciousness or desiring to be a master of
> others. ####
**** I didn't understand that paragraph too well either. But I think
it's difficult to express this with words. What I can feel is that
maybe he wanted to say "inner solitude and independence in thought,
and deriving insights and knowledge directly from the One, without
recourse to outside sources or masters and not isolationism". For
me, it would be strange that a truly enlightened being would sit in
isolation on a high mountain top so to speak. I see the truly
enlightened one amidst people they love, working on team building or
improving family relationships, or whatever. I know two such people
and I can say that in their presence, I feel I become a better
person without them trying to change me in any way. It's just their
state of beingness. And, contrary to what HK says, they love and
need their loved ones! And I think, too, that they know their
spouses and children quite well, contrary to HK! :-)