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

Arguing Over Eckankar At A.R.E.

Expand Messages
  • tomleafeater
    In the great sea of absolutely nothing people argue about absolutely nothing and claim to be the true and only spokesman for absolutely nothing. And in doing
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 30, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      In the great sea of absolutely nothing

      people argue about absolutely nothing

      and claim to be the true and only spokesman

      for absolutely nothing.

      And in doing so,

      they prove

      that they truly know the infinite.

      For they prove

      that they know


      A man once climbed up to the top of the hill

      and planted his flag

      on a mound of absolutely nothing.

      Then he returned and beat his chest

      and wailed as loudly

      as he could.

      He said he was the highest expression of

      absolutely nothing,

      and proclaimed himself to be a master.

      He wrote books about nothing,

      and these books were sold to others

      who wanted to read about nothing.

      And so others gathered around him

      and began wailing in similar fashion

      about nothing

      and they too felt they were in on nothing.

      They too, knew they were in possession of nothing.

      But then something dreadful occured.

      Others claimed the nothing was stolen.

      Others said they had nothing first.

      Others said He never really found nothing,

      and that he was lying about

      having found nothing...

      and they said he was a fraud of nothing.

      So they all got together to argue about nothing.

      They argued and argued about nothing for years

      and each thought they had won the argument about nothing.

      Each raised excellent points in the debate about nothing,

      and each thought

      the other side was mistaken about nothing.

      Many became upset over nothing, and they attacked others over

      Many felt they should serve the cause of nothing

      by standing up for nothing.

      Many felt that the were called by nothing

      to point out the flaws of those

      who argued over nothing.

      Some were even said to have left nothing,

      and that having left nothing,

      they were bound to reincarnate over and over again within nothing,

      until they realized that nothing was nothing, after all.

      All of the issues about nothing were considered very important

      by the ones

      who claimed to know all about nothing

      and they worked very hard and diligently

      to come up with clever ways

      to debate about nothing

      and they tried very hard to demonstrate that those who argued with

      over nothing...

      knew absolutely nothing.



      "Empty Room" wisely answered:

      >knew absolutely nothing.

      Good analogy, but keep in mind, it is through this very process
      that we come to discover this. If you realize this, then it is no
      doubt because you have been through this yourself. If this process
      were not an important part of our learning and growth, I suspect we
      would not be here. People seldom learn from words, but people do
      learn through direct experience. It all may be an illusion, but it is
      an illusion with a purpose, IMO. Nothing ventured, nothing
      gained. ;-)

      empty room - 975th Living Truth Master (on probation)


      Leaf replied:

      To elaborate further on your reply, E R, now that I have a little
      more time than I did the other day:

      I agree that the process is important and I see nothing at all wrong
      with debating Eckankar's absurd claims. I enjoy putting things into
      perspective, and it does occur to me that in the eyes of the "no
      thing" (if I can put it that way) none of this matters (or maybe it
      all matters equally). But in our human existence, we are dealing
      often with a different context, and that context reflects the
      personal, human perspective. It is an error to think the human
      perspective can be ignored for long, if one is human. We have to eat,
      sleep, and live as we are, and we have practical things to deal with
      everyday of our lives.

      The point of my post on "absolutely nothing" is mainly how ridiculous
      it is for anyone to act as if he has a franchise on spiritualmatters,
      since that is impossible. Such a concept contradicts itself by its
      very premise. This is one of the main criticisms that keeps
      recurring to me about Eckankar. If the great void or "no-thing"
      (sugmad, god, dao, etc) has no form, no shape, no division, no inside
      or outside, no separateness, then it doesn't make sense that it could
      be subject to one group or entity having a special claim over it, for
      that would imply that the great void is finite. If the great void is
      the only true "reality", and all else is only "appearances" or
      relativity, then all of the differentiating and parceling that
      religions indulge in are part of the world of relativity. Its really
      all much ado about nothing.

      In my view, a good philosophy or religion, no matter what myriad
      shape it takes, will exhibit a palpable sense of humility and
      awareness of limitation, not only of its teachings, but also of its
      teachers, and of its place in the life of its followers. A religion
      that is taken too seriously by its followers often signifies a
      religion that, as a religious entity, presumes to have intrinsic
      divinity in its own right. I think such presumptions violate the very
      premise upon which such religions are founded.

      I think, when you get right down to it, it is the astounding lack of
      humility in Eckankar and in its teachers and followers that gets
      Eckankar in trouble. And all of the lies, the willing trivialization
      of acts of plagiarism and invented histories, and the deceptive
      dialectic ju jitsu (sp) that is employed demonstrates profoundly the
      lack of humility. Who would care if people want to chant hu and do
      soul travel exercises, so long as they don't employ the use of nasty
      threats, fear, and claims of religious exclusivity to control and
      ensnare followers?

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.