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

Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

Expand Messages
  • ctecvie
    Hi harrisonferrel & all, Excellent post! See my comments below :) Ingrid
    Message 1 of 29 , Apr 4, 2010
      Hi harrisonferrel & all,
      Excellent post! See my comments below :)
      Ingrid

      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@...> wrote:
      >
      > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar — assumptions and rationalization.

      ***I can only agree. Basically, even most ekkies are nice guys, but their approach to life is very complicated and uniform. Of course they don't know it, but that's exactly what eckankar teaches them. In my view, the most important thing when leaving eckankar is to leave these structures of thinking and belief behind, and also the ekkie uniform behaviour. This takes much longer of course. As I said in another post, the most important lesson I drew from my experience in eckankar is to not fall into another trap of believing anything. Life is so varied and full of surprises and wonders that I don't need any "spiritual" explanations any more.
      >
      > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."

      *** Yeah, good old Freud is right!! LOL
      >
      > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.

      *** I think this expression has been worn out by all those "spiritual paths". The same for "soul", at least for me!
      >
      > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
      >
      > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.

      *** Ford Johnson was important to me as the book helped me get out of eckankar - but that was it. Basically, he set up another path similar to eckankar, which means he didn't really leave the structures I spoke of earlier behind. I've heard that Johnson knew very well that little harry wouldn't believe Graham Forsyth's story (which, by the way, took place in the belief structure of eckankar!) but that he used it for his own benefit. Well, what really happened is certainly more complex, but I tend to believe that this was one fact that made Ford do it. So he could expose eckankar for what it is (based entirely on Lane's findings!) and at the same time set up his own path.
      >
      > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.

      *** That's typical ekkie behaviour which we need to get rid of.
      >
      > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.

      *** Yes, I think so too. James Davis, the guy who wrote "The Rosetta Stone of God" and who left eckankar afterwards, said in one of his posts to Ford's message board that he wrote it to overcome his doubts about eckankar. He thought that once he had written it, he would be able to stay firmly in eckankar. Well, this was not so. He also said that when he was into Christian beliefs, Jesus or other Christian saints appeared him, and while he was in eckankar, he met eck masters.
      >
      > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.

      *** Critical thinking gets lost in eckankar, and for me that was the first and foremost thing to get back, together with my (bad) emotions to be whole again!
      >
      > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.

      *** It does, and it's dangerous because at first sight, it seems so harmless and "loving".
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Harrison,
      > >
      > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
      > >
      > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
      > >
      > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
      > >
      > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
      > >
      > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
      > >
      > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
      > >
      > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
      > >
      > > Jonathan
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
      > > >
      > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
      > > >
      > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
      > > >
      > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
      > > >
      > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
      > > >
      > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
      > > >
      > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
      > > >
      > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
      > > >
      > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
      > > >
      > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • jonathanjohns96
      Harrison, You are your own master simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it
      Message 2 of 29 , Apr 4, 2010
        Harrison,

        "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.

        You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already told you,
        when you realize that you are your own master you're not supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand why you have major problems with it.

        I know you don't care, but for others reading my response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your question anyway." That's what I am talking about.

        Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical.

        But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test" because they have let their ego get the best of them.

        The people who realize that they are their own master (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at things.

        Jonathan


        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@...> wrote:
        >
        > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and rationalization.
        >
        > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
        >
        > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.
        >
        > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
        >
        > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
        >
        > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
        >
        > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
        >
        > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
        >
        > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Harrison,
        > >
        > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
        > >
        > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
        > >
        > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
        > >
        > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
        > >
        > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
        > >
        > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
        > >
        > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
        > >
        > > Jonathan
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
        > > >
        > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
        > > >
        > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
        > > >
        > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
        > > >
        > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
        > > >
        > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
        > > >
        > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
        > > >
        > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
        > > >
        > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
        > > >
        > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • tomleafeater
        Jonathan, In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell tried to tone down all of that, and that you think of Klemp as the
        Message 3 of 29 , Apr 4, 2010
          Jonathan,

          In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about Twitchell?

          Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and omniscient, capable of anything.

          Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.

          But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:

          "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.

          Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel through which the ECK flows. "

          Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell


          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@...> wrote:
          >
          > Harrison,
          >
          > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
          >
          > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already told you,
          > when you realize that you are your own master you're not supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand why you have major problems with it.
          >
          > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
          >
          > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical.
          >
          > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test" because they have let their ego get the best of them.
          >
          > The people who realize that they are their own master (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at things.
          >
          > Jonathan
          >
          >
          > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
          > >
          > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and rationalization.
          > >
          > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
          > >
          > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.
          > >
          > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
          > >
          > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
          > >
          > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
          > >
          > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
          > >
          > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
          > >
          > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Harrison,
          > > >
          > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
          > > >
          > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
          > > >
          > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
          > > >
          > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
          > > >
          > > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
          > > >
          > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
          > > >
          > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
          > > >
          > > > Jonathan
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
          > > > >
          > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
          > > > >
          > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
          > > > >
          > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
          > > > >
          > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
          > > > >
          > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
          > > > >
          > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
          > > > >
          > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
          > > > >
          > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
          > > > >
          > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • tomleafeater
          Jonathan, In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell tried to tone down all of that, and that you think of Klemp as the
          Message 4 of 29 , Apr 4, 2010
            Jonathan,

            In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about Twitchell?

            Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and omniscient, capable of anything.

            Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.

            But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:

            "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.

            Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel through which the ECK flows. "

            Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell


            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@...> wrote:
            >
            > Harrison,
            >
            > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
            >
            > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already told you,
            > when you realize that you are your own master you're not supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand why you have major problems with it.
            >
            > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
            >
            > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical.
            >
            > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test" because they have let their ego get the best of them.
            >
            > The people who realize that they are their own master (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at things.
            >
            > Jonathan
            >
            >
            > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
            > >
            > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and rationalization.
            > >
            > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
            > >
            > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.
            > >
            > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
            > >
            > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
            > >
            > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
            > >
            > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
            > >
            > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
            > >
            > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Harrison,
            > > >
            > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
            > > >
            > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
            > > >
            > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
            > > >
            > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
            > > >
            > > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
            > > >
            > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
            > > >
            > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
            > > >
            > > > Jonathan
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
            > > > >
            > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
            > > > >
            > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
            > > > >
            > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
            > > > >
            > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
            > > > >
            > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
            > > > >
            > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
            > > > >
            > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
            > > > >
            > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
            > > > >
            > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
            > > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • jonathanjohns96
            Leaf, I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn t want to see
            Message 5 of 29 , Apr 6, 2010
              Leaf,

              I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the impression that I got.

              If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have already posted this.

              As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.

              Jonathan



              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater" <tianyue@...> wrote:
              >
              > Jonathan,
              >
              > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about Twitchell?
              >
              > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and omniscient, capable of anything.
              >
              > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
              >
              > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
              >
              > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
              >
              > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel through which the ECK flows. "
              >
              > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
              >
              >
              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Harrison,
              > >
              > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
              > >
              > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already told you,
              > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand why you have major problems with it.
              > >
              > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
              > >
              > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical.
              > >
              > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test" because they have let their ego get the best of them.
              > >
              > > The people who realize that they are their own master (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at things.
              > >
              > > Jonathan
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and rationalization.
              > > >
              > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
              > > >
              > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.
              > > >
              > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
              > > >
              > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
              > > >
              > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
              > > >
              > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
              > > >
              > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
              > > >
              > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > Harrison,
              > > > >
              > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
              > > > >
              > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
              > > > >
              > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
              > > > >
              > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
              > > > >
              > > > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
              > > > >
              > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
              > > > >
              > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
              > > > >
              > > > > Jonathan
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • etznab@aol.com
              It s an interesting subject. And I ve often contemplated how this idea of The Master first evolved over history. Especially on the Indian continent. There
              Message 6 of 29 , Apr 6, 2010
                It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.

                Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.

                Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                this.

                At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                dogma.

                I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.

                All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                Jewish influence though.

                I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                existed in ancient Indian religion.

                Etznab

                -----Original Message-----
                From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                 
                Leaf,

                I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people
                should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want
                to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                impression that I got.

                If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                already posted this.

                As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I
                obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself
                with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning
                we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is.
                When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can
                advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have
                a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have
                simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of
                your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their
                own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the
                LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a
                moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own
                spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.

                Jonathan

                --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                <tianyue@...> wrote:
                >
                > Jonathan,
                >
                > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that
                Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of
                "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to
                say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption
                is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                Twitchell?
                >
                > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the
                worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was
                highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                omniscient, capable of anything.
                >
                > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                >
                > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt.
                Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                >
                > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles,
                beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all
                those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must
                overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also
                taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major
                disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of
                His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only
                does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on
                earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other
                planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of
                god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times
                and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the
                Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart,
                and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                >
                > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior,
                but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and
                the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is
                not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual
                body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body
                of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and
                because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which
                flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is
                the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative
                function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His
                physical body is the only representation of the channel through which
                the ECK flows. "
                >
                > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                >
                >
                > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                <no_reply@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Harrison,
                > >
                > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge
                of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody
                else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone
                else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are
                the one to do it. That's all it means.
                > >
                > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already
                told you,
                > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                why you have major problems with it.
                > >
                > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response,
                none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There
                was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have
                said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck
                master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                > >
                > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of
                masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see
                how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone
                down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                egotistical.
                > >
                > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                > >
                > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                things.
                > >
                > > Jonathan
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                <no_reply@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                rationalization.
                > > >
                > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in
                the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no
                good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind
                gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no
                reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the
                imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar
                in your dream is just a cigar."
                > > >
                > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a
                master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a
                master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                little meaning in the West.
                > > >
                > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and
                scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I
                can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want
                to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then
                you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                claims.
                > > >
                > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read
                it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something
                valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum,
                because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                > > >
                > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you
                simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know
                the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                > > >
                > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was
                "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's
                program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work
                the lunacy pedals.
                > > >
                > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences,
                especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally
                ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences"
                without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without
                exhausting all other possible explanations.
                > > >
                > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their
                critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                <no_reply@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > Harrison,
                > > > >
                > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I
                believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling
                you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson
                emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of
                people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to
                read his book.
                > > > >
                > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They
                were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of
                inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So
                what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only)
                were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you
                were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing.
                Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own
                master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that
                you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just
                telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you
                don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                > > > >
                > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you
                specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                > > > >
                > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked
                by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences,
                plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you
                evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing
                like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the
                local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea
                of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of
                us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar
                said they should be.
                > > > >
                > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                > > > >
                > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary
                to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there
                is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a
                major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                reasons.
                > > > >
                > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in
                Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made
                me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God."
                I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                > > > >
                > > > > Jonathan
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                > > > > >
                > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be
                downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell
                you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you
                have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you.
                It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                threatens to upset the whole cult.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                satisfying answer.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I
                left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism
                and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is
                not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the
                unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had
                "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take
                them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense
                of self.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least,
                for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an
                earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people
                by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis
                that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its
                members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                > > > > >
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • David Osborn
                Dear Etznab,      The title Mahanta used for the LEM literally means the leader of the hermitage or ashram, and was a title used by the Kabir Panthis, or
                Message 7 of 29 , Apr 6, 2010
                  Dear Etznab,
                       The title "Mahanta" used for the LEM literally means the leader of the hermitage or ashram, and was a title used by the Kabir Panthis, or the followers of Kabir - who Eckankar claimed as one of their own lineage of LEMs. 
                                                                             David

                  --- On Tue, 4/6/10, etznab@... <etznab@...> wrote:

                  From: etznab@... <etznab@...>
                  Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                  To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Tuesday, April 6, 2010, 7:39 PM


                  It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                  how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                  Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                  and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                  "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                  line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.

                  Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                  Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.

                  Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                  in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                  specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                  on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                  this.

                  At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                  idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                  a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                  Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                  birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                  sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                  dogma.

                  I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                  order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                  (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                  into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                  to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.

                  All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                  continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                  ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                  Jewish influence though.

                  I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                  I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                  See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                  existed in ancient Indian religion.

                  Etznab

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                  To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                  Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                  Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                   
                  Leaf,

                  I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people
                  should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want
                  to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                  impression that I got.

                  If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                  because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                  know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                  was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                  already posted this.

                  As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I
                  obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself
                  with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning
                  we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is.
                  When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can
                  advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have
                  a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have
                  simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of
                  your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their
                  own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the
                  LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a
                  moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own
                  spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.

                  Jonathan

                  --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                  &lt;tianyue@...&gt; wrote:
                  &gt;
                  &gt; Jonathan,
                  &gt;
                  &gt; In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that
                  Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of
                  "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to
                  say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption
                  is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                  Twitchell?
                  &gt;
                  &gt; Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the
                  worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                  eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was
                  highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                  posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                  practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                  line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                  shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                  gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                  shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                  omniscient, capable of anything.
                  &gt;
                  &gt; Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                  enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                  masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                  &gt;
                  &gt; But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt.
                  Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                  &gt;
                  &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles,
                  beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all
                  those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must
                  overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also
                  taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major
                  disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of
                  His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only
                  does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on
                  earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other
                  planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                  psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of
                  god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times
                  and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the
                  Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart,
                  and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                  &gt;
                  &gt; Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior,
                  but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and
                  the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is
                  not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual
                  body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body
                  of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and
                  because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which
                  flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is
                  the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative
                  function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                  creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His
                  physical body is the only representation of the channel through which
                  the ECK flows. "
                  &gt;
                  &gt; Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                  &gt;
                  &gt;
                  &gt; --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                  &lt;no_reply@&gt; wrote:
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge
                  of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody
                  else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone
                  else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are
                  the one to do it. That's all it means.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already
                  told you,
                  &gt; &gt; when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                  supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                  others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                  a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                  why you have major problems with it.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; I know you don't care, but for others reading my response,
                  none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                  didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There
                  was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have
                  said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck
                  master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                  question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of
                  masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see
                  how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone
                  down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                  egotistical.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                  realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                  the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                  then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                  because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; The people who realize that they are their own master
                  (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                  without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                  the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                  things.
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                  &lt;no_reply@&gt; wrote:
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                  because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                  sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                  ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                  nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                  rationalization.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in
                  the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no
                  good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind
                  gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no
                  reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the
                  imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar
                  in your dream is just a cigar."
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; I am not a master of anything or anything close to a
                  master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a
                  master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                  little meaning in the West.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and
                  scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I
                  can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want
                  to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then
                  you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                  claims.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read
                  it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something
                  valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                  helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                  Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum,
                  because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you
                  simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know
                  the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                  psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                  single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                  not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was
                  "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's 
                  program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work
                  the lunacy pedals.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences,
                  especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally
                  ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences"
                  without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without
                  exhausting all other possible explanations.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their
                  critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                  &lt;no_reply@&gt; wrote:
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I believe you inner experiences were real. And I
                  believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling
                  you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson
                  emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of
                  people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to
                  read his book.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So getting back to your inner experiences. They
                  were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of
                  inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So
                  what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only)
                  were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you
                  were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing.
                  Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own
                  master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that
                  you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just
                  telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you
                  don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From this point on I am no longer talking about you
                  specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked
                  by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences,
                  plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you
                  evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing
                  like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the
                  local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                  asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea
                  of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of
                  us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar
                  said they should be.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I still remember something that I read on the
                  Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                  how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                  his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                  he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                  exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                  Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So lots of people have inner experiences contrary
                  to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there
                  is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a
                  major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                  discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                  embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                  talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                  reasons.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I once told a fellow member that all the books in
                  Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made
                  me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God."
                  I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                  later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                  example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                  it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                  harrisonferrel &lt;no_reply@&gt; wrote:
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                  amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                  my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                  including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                  something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                  the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                  throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                  in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                  narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                  characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                  that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                  pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                  rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When you have experiences that show you to be
                  downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell
                  you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you
                  have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you.
                  It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                  because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                  threatens to upset the whole cult.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I've come to see past lives and all other
                  dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                  my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                  nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                  sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                  to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                  satisfying answer.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                  morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                  has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                  ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                  couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                  matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I
                  left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                  what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                  a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                  words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                  writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                  this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                  plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism
                  and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is
                  not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the
                  unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                  believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                  experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I can only imagine that if harold klemp had
                  "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take
                  them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense
                  of self.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least,
                  for anybody, especially those like  us who entered the cult with an
                  earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people
                  by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis
                  that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its
                  members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt; &gt;
                  &gt; &gt;
                  &gt;


                           




                  ------------------------------------

                  Yahoo! Groups Links

                  <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                  <*> Your email settings:
                      Individual Email | Traditional

                  <*> To change settings online go to:
                      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                      (Yahoo! ID required)

                  <*> To change settings via email:
                      eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                      eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                  <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                  <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                • etznab@aol.com
                  Yes. Paul Twitchell s early Eckankar dictionary has Kabir referred to as an Eck Master. However, Harold Klemp s Eckankar Lexicon refers to Kabir as a follower
                  Message 8 of 29 , Apr 7, 2010
                    Yes. Paul Twitchell's early Eckankar dictionary has
                    Kabir referred to as an Eck Master.

                    However, Harold Klemp's Eckankar Lexicon refers
                    to Kabir as a "follower of ECK".

                    Funny that.

                    Etznab

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...>
                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 12:16 am
                    Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                    Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                     
                    Dear Etznab,
                         The title "Mahanta" used for the LEM literally means the leader of
                    the hermitage or ashram, and was a title used by the Kabir Panthis, or
                    the followers of Kabir - who Eckankar claimed as one of their own
                    lineage of LEMs. 
                                                                               David

                    --- On Tue, 4/6/10, etznab@... <etznab@...> wrote:

                    From: etznab@... <etznab@...>
                    Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                    Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Tuesday, April 6, 2010, 7:39 PM


                    It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                    how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                    Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                    and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                    "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                    line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.

                    Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                    Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.

                    Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                    in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                    specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                    on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                    this.

                    At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                    idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                    a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                    Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                    birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                    sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                    dogma.

                    I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                    order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                    (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                    into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                    to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.

                    All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                    continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                    ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                    Jewish influence though.

                    I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                    I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                    See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                    existed in ancient Indian religion.

                    Etznab

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                    Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                    Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                     
                    Leaf,

                    I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people
                    should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want
                    to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                    impression that I got.

                    If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                    because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                    know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                    was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                    already posted this.

                    As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I
                    obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself
                    with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning
                    we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is.
                    When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can
                    advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have
                    a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have
                    simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of
                    your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their
                    own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the
                    LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a
                    moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own
                    spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.

                    Jonathan

                    --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                    <tianyue@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Jonathan,
                    >
                    > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that
                    Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of
                    "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to
                    say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption
                    is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                    Twitchell?
                    >
                    > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the
                    worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                    eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was
                    highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                    posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                    practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                    line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                    shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                    gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                    shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                    omniscient, capable of anything.
                    >
                    > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                    enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                    masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                    >
                    > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt.
                    Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                    >
                    > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles,
                    beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all
                    those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must
                    overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also
                    taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major
                    disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of
                    His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only
                    does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on
                    earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other
                    planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                    psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of
                    god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times
                    and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the
                    Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart,
                    and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                    >
                    > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior,
                    but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and
                    the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is
                    not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual
                    body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body
                    of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and
                    because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which
                    flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is
                    the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative
                    function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                    creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His
                    physical body is the only representation of the channel through which
                    the ECK flows. "
                    >
                    > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                    <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Harrison,
                    > >
                    > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge
                    of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody
                    else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone
                    else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are
                    the one to do it. That's all it means.
                    > >
                    > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already
                    told you,
                    > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                    supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                    others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                    a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                    why you have major problems with it.
                    > >
                    > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response,
                    none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                    didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There
                    was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have
                    said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck
                    master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                    question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                    > >
                    > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of
                    masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see
                    how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone
                    down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                    egotistical.
                    > >
                    > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                    realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                    the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                    then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                    because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                    > >
                    > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                    (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                    without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                    the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                    things.
                    > >
                    > > Jonathan
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                    <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                    because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                    sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                    ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                    nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                    rationalization.
                    > > >
                    > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in
                    the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no
                    good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind
                    gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no
                    reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the
                    imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar
                    in your dream is just a cigar."
                    > > >
                    > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a
                    master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a
                    master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                    little meaning in the West.
                    > > >
                    > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and
                    scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I
                    can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want
                    to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then
                    you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                    claims.
                    > > >
                    > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read
                    it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something
                    valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                    helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                    Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum,
                    because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                    > > >
                    > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you
                    simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know
                    the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                    psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                    single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                    not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                    > > >
                    > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was
                    "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's 
                    program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work
                    the lunacy pedals.
                    > > >
                    > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences,
                    especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally
                    ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences"
                    without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without
                    exhausting all other possible explanations.
                    > > >
                    > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their
                    critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                    <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Harrison,
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I
                    believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling
                    you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson
                    emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of
                    people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to
                    read his book.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They
                    were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of
                    inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So
                    what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only)
                    were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you
                    were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing.
                    Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own
                    master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that
                    you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just
                    telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you
                    don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you
                    specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked
                    by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences,
                    plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you
                    evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing
                    like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the
                    local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                    asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea
                    of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of
                    us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar
                    said they should be.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                    Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                    how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                    his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                    he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                    exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                    Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                    > > > >
                    > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary
                    to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there
                    is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a
                    major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                    discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                    embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                    talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                    reasons.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in
                    Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made
                    me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God."
                    I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                    later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                    example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                    it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Jonathan
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                    harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                    amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                    my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                    including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                    something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                    the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                    throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                    in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                    narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                    characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                    that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                    pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                    rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be
                    downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell
                    you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you
                    have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you.
                    It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                    because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                    threatens to upset the whole cult.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                    dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                    my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                    nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                    sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                    to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                    satisfying answer.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                    morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                    has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                    ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                    couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                    matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I
                    left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                    what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                    a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                    words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                    writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                    this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                    plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism
                    and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is
                    not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the
                    unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                    believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                    experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had
                    "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take
                    them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense
                    of self.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least,
                    for anybody, especially those like  us who entered the cult with an
                    earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people
                    by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis
                    that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its
                    members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >


                             




                    ------------------------------------

                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                    <*> Your email settings:
                        Individual Email | Traditional

                    <*> To change settings online go to:
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                        (Yahoo! ID required)

                    <*> To change settings via email:
                        eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                        eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • jonathanjohns96
                    Etznab, I m wondering about one thing. How many Hindus actually follow a guru? And how devoted are they? A Hindu guy I knew in college had a photo of Yogananda
                    Message 9 of 29 , Apr 7, 2010
                      Etznab,

                      I'm wondering about one thing. How many Hindus actually follow a guru? And how devoted are they?

                      A Hindu guy I knew in college had a photo of Yogananda on his dresser.

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

                      I asked him about it, and he said it wasn't a big deal. He said that he always felt that there was something special about the guy, and he admired him, but that is all there was to it. This guy always told me the truth, and was very open so I tend to believe him about this. This situation tells me that just because Hindus have a photo of a guru displayed, it doesn't mean that they are a devout follower, whereas in the West we would automatically conclude that.

                      The second Hindu I spoke with was a lady living in the United States. I wrote about her on ESA over a year ago. She told me that she went to the local Hindu temple, and listened to the priest there, but she did not follow any guru. She was very emphatic about that.

                      So I am wondering? How many Hindus actually follow a guru? Could it be a really low number like ten percent?

                      Do we in the West simply assume that all Hindus follow a guru? The lady whom I spoke to made a point of stating she didn't follow a guru; I didn't specifically ask her about that. Is it possible that she started the habit of doing that because she noticed that Americans tend to assume that all Hindus follow a guru?

                      I'd really like to hear a percentage of how many Hindus actually follow a guru.

                      Jonathan



                      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                      > how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                      > Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                      > and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                      > "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                      > line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.
                      >
                      > Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                      > Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.
                      >
                      > Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                      > in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                      > specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                      > on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                      > this.
                      >
                      > At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                      > idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                      > a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                      > Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                      > birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                      > sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                      > dogma.
                      >
                      > I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                      > order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                      > (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                      > into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                      > to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.
                      >
                      > All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                      > continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                      > ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                      > Jewish influence though.
                      >
                      > I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                      > I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                      > See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                      > existed in ancient Indian religion.
                      >
                      > Etznab
                      >
                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                      > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                      > Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                      > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                      > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                      >
                      >  
                      > Leaf,
                      >
                      > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people
                      > should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want
                      > to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                      > impression that I got.
                      >
                      > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                      > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                      > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                      > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                      > already posted this.
                      >
                      > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I
                      > obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself
                      > with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning
                      > we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is.
                      > When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can
                      > advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have
                      > a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have
                      > simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of
                      > your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their
                      > own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the
                      > LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a
                      > moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own
                      > spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                      >
                      > Jonathan
                      >
                      > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                      > tianyue@ wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Jonathan,
                      > >
                      > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that
                      > Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of
                      > "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to
                      > say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption
                      > is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                      > Twitchell?
                      > >
                      > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the
                      > worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                      > eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was
                      > highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                      > posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                      > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                      > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                      > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                      > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                      > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                      > omniscient, capable of anything.
                      > >
                      > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                      > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                      > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                      > >
                      > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt.
                      > Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                      > >
                      > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles,
                      > beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all
                      > those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must
                      > overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also
                      > taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major
                      > disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of
                      > His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only
                      > does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on
                      > earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other
                      > planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                      > psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of
                      > god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times
                      > and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the
                      > Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart,
                      > and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                      > >
                      > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior,
                      > but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and
                      > the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is
                      > not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual
                      > body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body
                      > of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and
                      > because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which
                      > flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is
                      > the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative
                      > function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                      > creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His
                      > physical body is the only representation of the channel through which
                      > the ECK flows. "
                      > >
                      > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                      > <no_reply@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > Harrison,
                      > > >
                      > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge
                      > of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody
                      > else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone
                      > else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are
                      > the one to do it. That's all it means.
                      > > >
                      > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already
                      > told you,
                      > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                      > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                      > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                      > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                      > why you have major problems with it.
                      > > >
                      > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response,
                      > none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                      > didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There
                      > was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have
                      > said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck
                      > master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                      > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                      > > >
                      > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of
                      > masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see
                      > how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone
                      > down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                      > egotistical.
                      > > >
                      > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                      > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                      > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                      > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                      > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                      > > >
                      > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                      > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                      > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                      > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                      > things.
                      > > >
                      > > > Jonathan
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                      > <no_reply@> wrote:
                      > > > >
                      > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                      > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                      > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                      > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                      > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                      > rationalization.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in
                      > the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no
                      > good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind
                      > gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no
                      > reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the
                      > imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar
                      > in your dream is just a cigar."
                      > > > >
                      > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a
                      > master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a
                      > master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                      > little meaning in the West.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and
                      > scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I
                      > can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want
                      > to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then
                      > you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                      > claims.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read
                      > it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something
                      > valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                      > helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                      > Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum,
                      > because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you
                      > simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know
                      > the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                      > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                      > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                      > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was
                      > "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's
                      > program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work
                      > the lunacy pedals.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences,
                      > especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally
                      > ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences"
                      > without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without
                      > exhausting all other possible explanations.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their
                      > critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                      > <no_reply@> wrote:
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > Harrison,
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I
                      > believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling
                      > you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson
                      > emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of
                      > people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to
                      > read his book.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They
                      > were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of
                      > inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So
                      > what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only)
                      > were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you
                      > were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing.
                      > Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own
                      > master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that
                      > you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just
                      > telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you
                      > don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you
                      > specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked
                      > by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences,
                      > plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you
                      > evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing
                      > like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the
                      > local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                      > asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea
                      > of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of
                      > us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar
                      > said they should be.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                      > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                      > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                      > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                      > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                      > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                      > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary
                      > to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there
                      > is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a
                      > major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                      > discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                      > embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                      > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                      > reasons.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in
                      > Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made
                      > me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God."
                      > I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                      > later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                      > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                      > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > Jonathan
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                      > harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                      > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                      > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                      > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                      > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                      > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                      > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                      > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                      > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                      > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                      > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                      > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                      > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be
                      > downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell
                      > you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you
                      > have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you.
                      > It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                      > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                      > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                      > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                      > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                      > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                      > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                      > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                      > satisfying answer.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                      > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                      > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                      > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                      > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                      > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I
                      > left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                      > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                      > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                      > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                      > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                      > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                      > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism
                      > and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is
                      > not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the
                      > unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                      > believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                      > experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had
                      > "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take
                      > them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense
                      > of self.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least,
                      > for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an
                      > earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people
                      > by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis
                      > that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its
                      > members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                      > > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • jonathanjohns96
                      All, I have a few more observations. I had a friend from Thailand who was a graduate student. I once asked him What is the most difficult thing you had to
                      Message 10 of 29 , Apr 7, 2010
                        All,

                        I have a few more observations. I had a friend from Thailand who was a graduate student. I once asked him "What is the most difficult thing you had to adjust to when you came to the United States?" His exact words were "I had a hard time getting used to the idea of everybody being equal." Perplexed, I asked him "What do you mean?" He said that in Thailand everyone is either higher or lower than everybody else. He said that when you first meet someone in Thailand, each person will evaluate the other according to social status. A teacher is higher than a cab driver, etc. They reason they MUST do this is because a Thai person addresses another Thai with different words whether they are lower than themselves or higher than themselves. So if I were Thai, and I am talking to you, and said "Thank you" I would use one word for "you" if you are of higher social status, a different word for "you" if you are of lower social status then me. So everybody in Thailand constantly evaluates other people in this regard so that they know what word to "call" the other person.

                        Another interesting thing about Thailand. The first day of school there is designated as "honor the teacher day." Students spend the entire day giving talks thanking their teachers and presenting them with gifts. So the culture of honoring teachers is so strong that to Westerners it would border on worshiping their teachers.

                        How does this apply to India? I don't know specifically about India. I don't know whether these two things exist there. But the fact that the caste system existed there for a long time, and the mental attitude of it probably still exists, I would say that people in India are used to constantly evaluating others according to social status. And they then go along with some kind of rules which dictate how they are supposed to treat the other person.

                        In India, do they honor teachers almost the point of what Westerners would see as worship? I don't know, but I would not be at all surprised if they did. They do have an extreme respect for education.

                        I hope I have explained this well enough to indicate to you that something bordering on the worship of people of a higher status (from a Western viewpoint) is basically built into Thai culture. I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true in India.

                        By the way, I lived in Thailand for a year; that's how I know what goes on there with regard to the "honor the teacher day."

                        Jonathan


                        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Etznab,
                        >
                        > I'm wondering about one thing. How many Hindus actually follow a guru? And how devoted are they?
                        >
                        > A Hindu guy I knew in college had a photo of Yogananda on his dresser.
                        >
                        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramahansa_Yogananda
                        >
                        > I asked him about it, and he said it wasn't a big deal. He said that he always felt that there was something special about the guy, and he admired him, but that is all there was to it. This guy always told me the truth, and was very open so I tend to believe him about this. This situation tells me that just because Hindus have a photo of a guru displayed, it doesn't mean that they are a devout follower, whereas in the West we would automatically conclude that.
                        >
                        > The second Hindu I spoke with was a lady living in the United States. I wrote about her on ESA over a year ago. She told me that she went to the local Hindu temple, and listened to the priest there, but she did not follow any guru. She was very emphatic about that.
                        >
                        > So I am wondering? How many Hindus actually follow a guru? Could it be a really low number like ten percent?
                        >
                        > Do we in the West simply assume that all Hindus follow a guru? The lady whom I spoke to made a point of stating she didn't follow a guru; I didn't specifically ask her about that. Is it possible that she started the habit of doing that because she noticed that Americans tend to assume that all Hindus follow a guru?
                        >
                        > I'd really like to hear a percentage of how many Hindus actually follow a guru.
                        >
                        > Jonathan
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                        > > how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                        > > Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                        > > and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                        > > "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                        > > line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.
                        > >
                        > > Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                        > > Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.
                        > >
                        > > Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                        > > in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                        > > specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                        > > on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                        > > this.
                        > >
                        > > At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                        > > idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                        > > a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                        > > Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                        > > birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                        > > sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                        > > dogma.
                        > >
                        > > I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                        > > order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                        > > (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                        > > into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                        > > to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.
                        > >
                        > > All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                        > > continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                        > > ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                        > > Jewish influence though.
                        > >
                        > > I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                        > > I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                        > > See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                        > > existed in ancient Indian religion.
                        > >
                        > > Etznab
                        > >
                        > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                        > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                        > > Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                        > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                        > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                        > >
                        > >  
                        > > Leaf,
                        > >
                        > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people
                        > > should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want
                        > > to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                        > > impression that I got.
                        > >
                        > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                        > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                        > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                        > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                        > > already posted this.
                        > >
                        > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I
                        > > obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself
                        > > with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning
                        > > we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is.
                        > > When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can
                        > > advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have
                        > > a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have
                        > > simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of
                        > > your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their
                        > > own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the
                        > > LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a
                        > > moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own
                        > > spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                        > >
                        > > Jonathan
                        > >
                        > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                        > > tianyue@ wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > Jonathan,
                        > > >
                        > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that
                        > > Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of
                        > > "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to
                        > > say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption
                        > > is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                        > > Twitchell?
                        > > >
                        > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the
                        > > worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                        > > eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was
                        > > highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                        > > posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                        > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                        > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                        > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                        > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                        > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                        > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                        > > >
                        > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                        > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                        > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                        > > >
                        > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt.
                        > > Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                        > > >
                        > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles,
                        > > beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all
                        > > those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must
                        > > overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also
                        > > taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major
                        > > disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of
                        > > His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only
                        > > does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on
                        > > earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other
                        > > planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                        > > psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of
                        > > god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times
                        > > and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the
                        > > Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart,
                        > > and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                        > > >
                        > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior,
                        > > but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and
                        > > the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is
                        > > not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual
                        > > body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body
                        > > of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and
                        > > because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which
                        > > flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is
                        > > the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative
                        > > function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                        > > creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His
                        > > physical body is the only representation of the channel through which
                        > > the ECK flows. "
                        > > >
                        > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                        > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Harrison,
                        > > > >
                        > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge
                        > > of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody
                        > > else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone
                        > > else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are
                        > > the one to do it. That's all it means.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already
                        > > told you,
                        > > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                        > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                        > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                        > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                        > > why you have major problems with it.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response,
                        > > none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                        > > didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There
                        > > was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have
                        > > said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck
                        > > master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                        > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of
                        > > masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see
                        > > how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone
                        > > down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                        > > egotistical.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                        > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                        > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                        > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                        > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                        > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                        > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                        > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                        > > things.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Jonathan
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                        > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                        > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                        > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                        > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                        > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                        > > rationalization.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in
                        > > the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no
                        > > good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind
                        > > gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no
                        > > reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the
                        > > imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar
                        > > in your dream is just a cigar."
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a
                        > > master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a
                        > > master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                        > > little meaning in the West.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and
                        > > scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I
                        > > can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want
                        > > to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then
                        > > you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                        > > claims.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read
                        > > it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something
                        > > valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                        > > helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                        > > Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum,
                        > > because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you
                        > > simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know
                        > > the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                        > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                        > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                        > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was
                        > > "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's
                        > > program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work
                        > > the lunacy pedals.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences,
                        > > especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally
                        > > ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences"
                        > > without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without
                        > > exhausting all other possible explanations.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their
                        > > critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                        > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > Harrison,
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I
                        > > believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling
                        > > you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson
                        > > emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of
                        > > people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to
                        > > read his book.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They
                        > > were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of
                        > > inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So
                        > > what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only)
                        > > were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you
                        > > were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing.
                        > > Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own
                        > > master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that
                        > > you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just
                        > > telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you
                        > > don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you
                        > > specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked
                        > > by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences,
                        > > plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you
                        > > evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing
                        > > like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the
                        > > local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                        > > asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea
                        > > of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of
                        > > us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar
                        > > said they should be.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                        > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                        > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                        > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                        > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                        > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                        > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary
                        > > to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there
                        > > is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a
                        > > major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                        > > discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                        > > embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                        > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                        > > reasons.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in
                        > > Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made
                        > > me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God."
                        > > I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                        > > later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                        > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                        > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > Jonathan
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                        > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                        > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                        > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                        > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                        > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                        > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                        > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                        > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                        > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                        > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                        > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                        > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                        > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be
                        > > downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell
                        > > you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you
                        > > have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you.
                        > > It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                        > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                        > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                        > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                        > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                        > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                        > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                        > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                        > > satisfying answer.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                        > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                        > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                        > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                        > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                        > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I
                        > > left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                        > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                        > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                        > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                        > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                        > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                        > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism
                        > > and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is
                        > > not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the
                        > > unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                        > > believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                        > > experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had
                        > > "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take
                        > > them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense
                        > > of self.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least,
                        > > for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an
                        > > earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people
                        > > by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis
                        > > that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its
                        > > members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                        > > > > > > >
                        > > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • etznab@aol.com
                        Traditionally speaking, I think the Hindu guru was like a teacher, instructor, or mentor. Like, if a person wanted to learn something, whether carpentry,
                        Message 11 of 29 , Apr 8, 2010
                          Traditionally speaking, I think the Hindu "guru"
                          was like a teacher, instructor, or mentor. Like,
                          if a person wanted to learn something, whether
                          carpentry, art, or whatever, they would go live
                          with a person who had experience in that field.
                          In other words, it would be like a one on one
                          form of teaching. This was probably common
                          at one time. And not only in India.

                          Did you ever watch Kung Fu Theater? A show
                          years ago where people would go find a master
                          to teach them martial arts? They would spend
                          time with the person until they learned the skill.
                          Then they would move on.

                          I could be wrong, but my understanding of the
                          traditional Hindu guru (in the olden days) was
                          like a way for a person to get an education. It
                          sounds to me a little like private and / or home
                          schooling.

                          How the idea of "guru" morphed into "God on
                          Earth", "The Chosen One" or "Only Begotten
                          Son of God" (born of a virgin and all that) ... it
                          sounds to me like Western religious influence.
                          For all I know it could be a form of control, like
                          what Constantine did with Christianity. Wiping
                          out the Pagan influences and subjecting them
                          to a single banner under the Roman Empire.
                          *Catholic means "universal", I think. And so it
                          seems (to me) that the State had an influence
                          over religion at one time. More or less deciding
                          how official dogma was written. At one time
                          you had the Roman Emperor naming the Pope.
                          Another time the Popes named the Emperors.
                          I think.

                          So imagine what it was like after Islam, and
                          later Christianity, entering India. Especially the
                          continent of India under British influence. It's
                          just a guess on my part, but if you could get
                          all the people - even a large portion of people to
                          follow one person (be it guru, whatever) think of
                          the influence a foreign power could have in India
                          if they propped up a certain "guru". In today's
                          world when a foreign power wants to influence
                          another country they usually try to put in power
                          a person sympathetic to their interests. And
                          get people to support / follow that person - even
                          if that means overthrowing (by revolution or *coup)
                          the ruling establishment.

                          It's all just guessing on my part, but I'm trying
                          to imagine how monotheistic religions looked
                          upon the people of India with all their "gods" &
                          icons, etc. Idol worship could very easily be in-
                          terpreted as unreligious to a monotheistic faith.
                          And I don't doubt that people from the West in-
                          terpreted ancient Indian beliefs according to their
                          own understanding.

                          So how do I know this paradigm about a single
                          person representing "God" on Earth was not a
                          natural consequence of people in power having
                          a desire to find a way for controlling the masses?
                          Especially those with varied spiritual beliefs?

                          When missionaries go to indigenous cultures
                          and introduce their "God" and "Savior" is it out
                          of respect for indigenous beliefs and culture?
                          Or is it a means to "save" and / or influence
                          those foreign people?

                          A really good subject this is. IMO.

                          *Catholic

                          http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=catholic&searchmode=none

                          Coup

                          http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=coup&searchmode=none




                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                          To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 10:08 pm
                          Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                          Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                           
                          Etznab,

                          I'm wondering about one thing. How many Hindus actually follow a guru?
                          And how devoted are they?

                          A Hindu guy I knew in college had a photo of Yogananda on his dresser.

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

                          I asked him about it, and he said it wasn't a big deal. He said that he
                          always felt that there was something special about the guy, and he
                          admired him, but that is all there was to it. This guy always told me
                          the truth, and was very open so I tend to believe him about this. This
                          situation tells me that just because Hindus have a photo of a guru
                          displayed, it doesn't mean that they are a devout follower, whereas in
                          the West we would automatically conclude that.

                          The second Hindu I spoke with was a lady living in the United States. I
                          wrote about her on ESA over a year ago. She told me that she went to
                          the local Hindu temple, and listened to the priest there, but she did
                          not follow any guru. She was very emphatic about that.

                          So I am wondering? How many Hindus actually follow a guru? Could it be
                          a really low number like ten percent?

                          Do we in the West simply assume that all Hindus follow a guru? The lady
                          whom I spoke to made a point of stating she didn't follow a guru; I
                          didn't specifically ask her about that. Is it possible that she started
                          the habit of doing that because she noticed that Americans tend to
                          assume that all Hindus follow a guru?

                          I'd really like to hear a percentage of how many Hindus actually follow
                          a guru.

                          Jonathan

                          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                          > how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                          > Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                          > and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                          > "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                          > line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.
                          >
                          > Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                          > Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.
                          >
                          > Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                          > in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                          > specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                          > on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                          > this.
                          >
                          > At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                          > idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                          > a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                          > Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                          > birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                          > sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                          > dogma.
                          >
                          > I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                          > order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                          > (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                          > into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                          > to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.
                          >
                          > All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                          > continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                          > ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                          > Jewish influence though.
                          >
                          > I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                          > I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                          > See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                          > existed in ancient Indian religion.
                          >
                          > Etznab
                          >
                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                          > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                          > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                          Maybe.
                          > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                          >
                          >  
                          > Leaf,
                          >
                          > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                          people
                          > should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                          want
                          > to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                          > impression that I got.
                          >
                          > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                          > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I
                          don't
                          > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                          someone who
                          > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may
                          have
                          > already posted this.
                          >
                          > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                          Eckankar I
                          > obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern
                          myself
                          > with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master,
                          meaning
                          > we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else
                          is.
                          > When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like
                          they can
                          > advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I
                          have
                          > a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could
                          have
                          > simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care
                          of
                          > your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as
                          their
                          > own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of
                          the
                          > LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's
                          all a
                          > moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with
                          my own
                          > spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                          >
                          > Jonathan
                          >
                          > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                          > tianyue@ wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Jonathan,
                          > >
                          > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                          that
                          > Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                          think of
                          > "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just
                          have to
                          > say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                          assumption
                          > is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about
                          > Twitchell?
                          > >
                          > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                          and the
                          > worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's
                          > eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT
                          was
                          > highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall
                          > posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                          > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand
                          in
                          > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                          > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and
                          would
                          > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                          > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                          > omniscient, capable of anything.
                          > >
                          > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                          > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                          > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                          > >
                          > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                          doubt.
                          > Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                          > >
                          > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                          principles,
                          > beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for
                          all
                          > those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                          must
                          > overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                          also
                          > taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                          major
                          > disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part
                          of
                          > His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not
                          only
                          > does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race
                          on
                          > earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on
                          other
                          > planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the
                          > psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                          planes of
                          > god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at
                          times
                          > and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in
                          the
                          > Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                          heart,
                          > and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                          > >
                          > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                          savior,
                          > but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes,
                          and
                          > the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This
                          is
                          > not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                          spiritual
                          > body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual
                          body
                          > of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself,
                          and
                          > because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence
                          which
                          > flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT.
                          This is
                          > the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the
                          creative
                          > function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man,
                          > creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                          life. His
                          > physical body is the only representation of the channel through
                          which
                          > the ECK flows. "
                          > >
                          > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                          > <no_reply@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > Harrison,
                          > > >
                          > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                          charge
                          > of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                          nobody
                          > else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                          someone
                          > else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU
                          are
                          > the one to do it. That's all it means.
                          > > >
                          > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                          already
                          > told you,
                          > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                          > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                          > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you
                          that
                          > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                          understand
                          > why you have major problems with it.
                          > > >
                          > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                          response,
                          > none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They
                          > didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                          There
                          > was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                          have
                          > said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                          Eck
                          > master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                          > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                          > > >
                          > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                          of
                          > masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                          see
                          > how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                          tone
                          > down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                          > egotistical.
                          > > >
                          > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                          > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                          worshiping
                          > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                          realized" and
                          > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the
                          test"
                          > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                          > > >
                          > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                          > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their
                          own
                          > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have
                          "passed
                          > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking
                          at
                          > things.
                          > > >
                          > > > Jonathan
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                          > <no_reply@> wrote:
                          > > > >
                          > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                          > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your
                          reply
                          > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                          > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                          > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions
                          and
                          > rationalization.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                          in
                          > the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based
                          on no
                          > good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                          mind
                          > gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                          is no
                          > reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                          of the
                          > imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                          cigar
                          > in your dream is just a cigar."
                          > > > >
                          > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                          a
                          > master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she
                          is a
                          > master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                          > little meaning in the West.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                          and
                          > scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                          analogy, I
                          > can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you
                          want
                          > to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message,
                          then
                          > you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your
                          > claims.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                          read
                          > it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                          something
                          > valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or
                          > helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of
                          > Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                          forum,
                          > because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                          you
                          > simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                          know
                          > the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                          > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on
                          a
                          > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do.
                          It's
                          > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                          he was
                          > "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                          klemp's
                          > program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to
                          work
                          > the lunacy pedals.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                          experiences,
                          > especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But
                          equally
                          > ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                          "experiences"
                          > without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post,
                          without
                          > exhausting all other possible explanations.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                          their
                          > critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                          jonathanjohns96
                          > <no_reply@> wrote:
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Harrison,
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                          I
                          > believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                          telling
                          > you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                          Johnson
                          > emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a
                          lot of
                          > people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                          time to
                          > read his book.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                          They
                          > were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                          of
                          > inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                          So
                          > what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                          only)
                          > were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when
                          you
                          > were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                          thing.
                          > Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                          own
                          > master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                          that
                          > you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                          just
                          > telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                          you
                          > don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                          about you
                          > specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                          hand-picked
                          > by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                          experiences,
                          > plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as
                          you
                          > evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are
                          nothing
                          > like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask
                          the
                          > local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And
                          > asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst
                          idea
                          > of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of
                          all of
                          > us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what
                          Eckankar
                          > said they should be.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                          > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story
                          about
                          > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly
                          left
                          > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put
                          it,
                          > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                          > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you
                          there.
                          > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                          contrary
                          > to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do,
                          there
                          > is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                          actually a
                          > major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely
                          > discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are
                          > embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                          > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                          > reasons.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                          in
                          > Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                          made
                          > me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                          God."
                          > I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I
                          > later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                          > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you
                          know
                          > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Jonathan
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                          > harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                          > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                          contents of
                          > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                          > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                          > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms
                          that
                          > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                          > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major
                          events
                          > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                          > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of
                          deranged
                          > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little
                          bell
                          > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded
                          nutjob
                          > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                          > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                          un-believe-able.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                          to be
                          > downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                          tell
                          > you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                          you
                          > have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                          you.
                          > It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                          > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                          > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                          > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of
                          much of
                          > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                          > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with
                          any
                          > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would
                          want
                          > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                          > satisfying answer.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                          > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind.
                          It
                          > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed,
                          years
                          > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                          > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                          > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                          I
                          > left and looked into just about every other possible explanation
                          for
                          > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                          eckankar, as
                          > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions
                          for old
                          > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in
                          the
                          > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people
                          in
                          > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                          innumerable
                          > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                          Buddhism
                          > and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                          imagination is
                          > not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to
                          the
                          > unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases)
                          > believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                          > experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                          had
                          > "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                          take
                          > them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                          sense
                          > of self.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                          least,
                          > for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                          an
                          > earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                          people
                          > by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                          diagnosis
                          > that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give
                          to its
                          > members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the
                          helm.
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >
                        • etznab@aol.com
                          Just as a side note. Does anybody know how the darker skinned indigenous people from southern India were treated when that caste system came in with the
                          Message 12 of 29 , Apr 8, 2010
                            Just as a side note. Does anybody know
                            how the darker skinned indigenous people
                            from southern India were treated when that
                            caste system came in with the Aryans?

                            I mean, like what proportion of the darker
                            skinned people from southern India were
                            relegated to the lower castes generally?

                            Etznab

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                            To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 10:39 pm
                            Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                            Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                             
                            All,

                            I have a few more observations. I had a friend from Thailand who was a
                            graduate student. I once asked him "What is the most difficult thing
                            you had to adjust to when you came to the United States?" His exact
                            words were "I had a hard time getting used to the idea of everybody
                            being equal." Perplexed, I asked him "What do you mean?" He said that
                            in Thailand everyone is either higher or lower than everybody else. He
                            said that when you first meet someone in Thailand, each person will
                            evaluate the other according to social status. A teacher is higher than
                            a cab driver, etc. They reason they MUST do this is because a Thai
                            person addresses another Thai with different words whether they are
                            lower than themselves or higher than themselves. So if I were Thai, and
                            I am talking to you, and said "Thank you" I would use one word for
                            "you" if you are of higher social status, a different word for "you" if
                            you are of lower social status then me. So everybody in Thailand
                            constantly evaluates other people in this regard so that they know what
                            word to "call" the other person.

                            Another interesting thing about Thailand. The first day of school there
                            is designated as "honor the teacher day." Students spend the entire day
                            giving talks thanking their teachers and presenting them with gifts. So
                            the culture of honoring teachers is so strong that to Westerners it
                            would border on worshiping their teachers.

                            How does this apply to India? I don't know specifically about India. I
                            don't know whether these two things exist there. But the fact that the
                            caste system existed there for a long time, and the mental attitude of
                            it probably still exists, I would say that people in India are used to
                            constantly evaluating others according to social status. And they then
                            go along with some kind of rules which dictate how they are supposed to
                            treat the other person.

                            In India, do they honor teachers almost the point of what Westerners
                            would see as worship? I don't know, but I would not be at all surprised
                            if they did. They do have an extreme respect for education.

                            I hope I have explained this well enough to indicate to you that
                            something bordering on the worship of people of a higher status (from a
                            Western viewpoint) is basically built into Thai culture. I wouldn't be
                            surprised if the same is true in India.

                            By the way, I lived in Thailand for a year; that's how I know what goes
                            on there with regard to the "honor the teacher day."

                            Jonathan

                            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                            <no_reply@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Etznab,
                            >
                            > I'm wondering about one thing. How many Hindus actually follow a
                            guru? And how devoted are they?
                            >
                            > A Hindu guy I knew in college had a photo of Yogananda on his
                            dresser.
                            >
                            > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramahansa_Yogananda
                            >
                            > I asked him about it, and he said it wasn't a big deal. He said
                            that he always felt that there was something special about the guy, and
                            he admired him, but that is all there was to it. This guy always told
                            me the truth, and was very open so I tend to believe him about this.
                            This situation tells me that just because Hindus have a photo of a guru
                            displayed, it doesn't mean that they are a devout follower, whereas in
                            the West we would automatically conclude that.
                            >
                            > The second Hindu I spoke with was a lady living in the United
                            States. I wrote about her on ESA over a year ago. She told me that she
                            went to the local Hindu temple, and listened to the priest there, but
                            she did not follow any guru. She was very emphatic about that.
                            >
                            > So I am wondering? How many Hindus actually follow a guru? Could
                            it be a really low number like ten percent?
                            >
                            > Do we in the West simply assume that all Hindus follow a guru? The
                            lady whom I spoke to made a point of stating she didn't follow a guru;
                            I didn't specifically ask her about that. Is it possible that she
                            started the habit of doing that because she noticed that Americans tend
                            to assume that all Hindus follow a guru?
                            >
                            > I'd really like to hear a percentage of how many Hindus actually
                            follow a guru.
                            >
                            > Jonathan
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > It's an interesting subject. And I've often contemplated
                            > > how this idea of "The Master" first evolved over history.
                            > > Especially on the Indian continent. There were gurus
                            > > and masters in India for centuries, but the idea of one
                            > > "Living Master" above all the others sounds more in the
                            > > line of "Western" dogma (and it's root religions) to me.
                            > >
                            > > Like Judaism has the Messiah. Christianity has Christ
                            > > Islam has Mohammad and Sufism the Qutub.
                            > >
                            > > Even though literature about Living Masters appeared
                            > > in Julian Johnson's 1939 book, I don't know there was
                            > > specified "THE" Living Master. I think emphasis was
                            > > on finding "A" Living Master. Perhaps I'm wrong about
                            > > this.
                            > >
                            > > At any rate, I am not sure that it's an Indian belief the
                            > > idea of "Mahanta" being something like a "Messiah",
                            > > a "Son of God" or the greatest prophet above others.
                            > > Instead, I've heard that Indian children are taught from
                            > > birth that "everybody is God". Singling out one person
                            > > sounds to me like infiltration of "Western" religion and
                            > > dogma.
                            > >
                            > > I haven't researched the topic sufficiently (to date) in
                            > > order to conclude where the "idea" of THE MASTER
                            > > (one above all others) came from and how it entered
                            > > into Hindu religion. Maybe it is not Hindu, but closer
                            > > to Sikh, Islamic, Christian or Judaic dogma generally.
                            > >
                            > > All of the latter religions made inroads on the Indian
                            > > continent throughout history, I believe. Islam, Christ-
                            > > ianity and Sikhism especially. I'm not sure about any
                            > > Jewish influence though.
                            > >
                            > > I can look into this over the next few weeks because
                            > > I know people familiar with Hindu religion in general.
                            > > See if I can determine if a "THE MASTER" paradigm
                            > > existed in ancient Indian religion.
                            > >
                            > > Etznab
                            > >
                            > > -----Original Message-----
                            > > From: jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                            > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                            > > Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 7:00 am
                            > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                            Greater. Maybe.
                            > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                            > >
                            > >  
                            > > Leaf,
                            > >
                            > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized
                            that people
                            > > should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he
                            didn't want
                            > > to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is
                            the
                            > > impression that I got.
                            > >
                            > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post
                            them
                            > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message
                            board. I don't
                            > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                            someone who
                            > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that
                            you may have
                            > > already posted this.
                            > >
                            > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                            Eckankar I
                            > > obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                            concern myself
                            > > with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                            master, meaning
                            > > we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody
                            else is.
                            > > When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting
                            like they can
                            > > advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is
                            when I have
                            > > a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs
                            could have
                            > > simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking
                            care of
                            > > your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves
                            as their
                            > > own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think
                            any of the
                            > > LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers.
                            It's all a
                            > > moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned
                            with my own
                            > > spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                            > >
                            > > Jonathan
                            > >
                            > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                            > > tianyue@ wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > Jonathan,
                            > > >
                            > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you
                            have that
                            > > Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                            think of
                            > > "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I
                            just have to
                            > > say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                            assumption
                            > > is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                            about
                            > > Twitchell?
                            > > >
                            > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                            Klemp, and the
                            > > worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                            today's
                            > > eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the
                            org, PT was
                            > > highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                            wall
                            > > posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum.
                            People
                            > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would
                            stand in
                            > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan"
                            and to
                            > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity,
                            and would
                            > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you
                            feel the
                            > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful
                            and
                            > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                            > > >
                            > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or
                            was
                            > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by
                            inner
                            > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                            > > >
                            > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                            doubt.
                            > > Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                            > > >
                            > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                            principles,
                            > > beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                            for all
                            > > those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time,
                            He must
                            > > overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                            faiths are also
                            > > taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at
                            the major
                            > > disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                            part of
                            > > His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                            Not only
                            > > does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                            race on
                            > > earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of
                            life on other
                            > > planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                            the
                            > > psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                            planes of
                            > > god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                            at times
                            > > and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                            in the
                            > > Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest
                            His heart,
                            > > and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                            universes.
                            > > >
                            > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                            world savior,
                            > > but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                            planes, and
                            > > the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God.
                            This is
                            > > not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                            spiritual
                            > > body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                            spiritual body
                            > > of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                            Itself, and
                            > > because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                            essence which
                            > > flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is
                            IT. This is
                            > > the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the
                            creative
                            > > function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                            man,
                            > > creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                            life. His
                            > > physical body is the only representation of the channel
                            through which
                            > > the ECK flows. "
                            > > >
                            > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                            > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Harrison,
                            > > > >
                            > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are
                            in charge
                            > > of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other
                            words, nobody
                            > > else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility
                            to someone
                            > > else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                            YOU are
                            > > the one to do it. That's all it means.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                            already
                            > > told you,
                            > > > > when you realize that you are your own master
                            you're not
                            > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better
                            than
                            > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with
                            you that
                            > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                            understand
                            > > why you have major problems with it.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                            response,
                            > > none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                            They
                            > > didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                            least. There
                            > > was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                            reported to have
                            > > said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question."
                            The Eck
                            > > master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask
                            your
                            > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme
                            worship of
                            > > masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is
                            easy to see
                            > > how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried
                            to tone
                            > > down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become
                            more
                            > > egotistical.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am
                            God
                            > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                            worshiping
                            > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                            realized" and
                            > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed
                            the test"
                            > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > The people who realize that they are their own
                            master
                            > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on
                            their own
                            > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who
                            have "passed
                            > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of
                            looking at
                            > > things.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Jonathan
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                            harrisonferrel
                            > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a
                            person,
                            > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but
                            your reply
                            > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge
                            or
                            > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the
                            same
                            > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar �
                            assumptions and
                            > > rationalization.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are
                            blue in
                            > > the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                            based on no
                            > > good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that
                            the mind
                            > > gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not,
                            there is no
                            > > reason to read into these images anything more than the
                            workings of the
                            > > imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes
                            a cigar
                            > > in your dream is just a cigar."
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything
                            close to a
                            > > master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he
                            or she is a
                            > > master. This word, master, is used without care or respect.
                            It has
                            > > little meaning in the West.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of
                            images and
                            > > scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                            analogy, I
                            > > can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                            you want
                            > > to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                            message, then
                            > > you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up
                            your
                            > > claims.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the
                            time I read
                            > > it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                            something
                            > > valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                            good or
                            > > helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more
                            out of
                            > > Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with
                            this forum,
                            > > because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and
                            visions, you
                            > > simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you
                            don't know
                            > > the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                            > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis
                            based on a
                            > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong
                            to do. It's
                            > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess
                            that he was
                            > > "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                            klemp's
                            > > program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                            candidate to work
                            > > the lunacy pedals.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                            experiences,
                            > > especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But
                            equally
                            > > ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                            "experiences"
                            > > without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post,
                            without
                            > > exhausting all other possible explanations.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people
                            of their
                            > > critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                            jonathanjohns96
                            > > <no_reply@> wrote:
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > Harrison,
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were
                            real. And I
                            > > believe that they were just for you. They were almost
                            certainly telling
                            > > you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                            Johnson
                            > > emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only
                            because a lot of
                            > > people are familiar with him, but many people have not had
                            the time to
                            > > read his book.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > So getting back to your inner
                            experiences. They
                            > > were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this
                            type of
                            > > inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                            mildly). So
                            > > what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for
                            you only)
                            > > were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                            when you
                            > > were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about
                            one thing.
                            > > Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are
                            your own
                            > > master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1)
                            think that
                            > > you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It
                            was just
                            > > telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny
                            and (2) you
                            > > don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                            about you
                            > > specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                            hand-picked
                            > > by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                            experiences,
                            > > plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                            problem, as you
                            > > evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are
                            nothing
                            > > like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you
                            ask the
                            > > local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either.
                            And
                            > > asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the
                            worst idea
                            > > of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit
                            of all of
                            > > us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what
                            Eckankar
                            > > said they should be.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on
                            the
                            > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a
                            story about
                            > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and
                            promptly left
                            > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the
                            emphatically put it,
                            > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how
                            the
                            > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for
                            you there.
                            > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                            contrary
                            > > to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                            do, there
                            > > is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                            actually a
                            > > major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                            rarely
                            > > discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                            are
                            > > embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                            specifically
                            > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about
                            possible
                            > > reasons.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the
                            books in
                            > > Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                            experiences made
                            > > me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone
                            Of God."
                            > > I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck
                            book. I
                            > > later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                            another
                            > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before
                            you know
                            > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > Jonathan
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                            > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was
                            completely
                            > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                            contents of
                            > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human
                            beings,
                            > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                            > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain
                            terms that
                            > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was
                            on a
                            > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the
                            major events
                            > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of
                            thing?
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person,
                            a
                            > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order
                            of deranged
                            > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a
                            little bell
                            > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the
                            deluded nutjob
                            > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose
                            fantastic
                            > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                            un-believe-able.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show
                            you to be
                            > > downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick
                            to tell
                            > > you it's because you need the light or some other such crap.
                            When you
                            > > have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do
                            with you.
                            > > It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares
                            them
                            > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's
                            scary and
                            > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all
                            other
                            > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy
                            of much of
                            > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is
                            just
                            > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do
                            with any
                            > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind
                            would want
                            > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon
                            a
                            > > satisfying answer.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell
                            or
                            > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart
                            mind. It
                            > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was
                            amazed, years
                            > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I
                            found a
                            > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar
                            subject
                            > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I
                            thought.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with
                            eckankar, I
                            > > left and looked into just about every other possible
                            explanation for
                            > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                            eckankar, as
                            > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing
                            definitions for old
                            > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced
                            in the
                            > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good
                            people in
                            > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                            innumerable
                            > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                            Buddhism
                            > > and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                            imagination is
                            > > not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor.
                            But to the
                            > > unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many
                            cases)
                            > > believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body
                            > > experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold
                            klemp had
                            > > "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he
                            would take
                            > > them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                            distorted sense
                            > > of self.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                            least,
                            > > for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult
                            with an
                            > > earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                            better people
                            > > by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                            diagnosis
                            > > that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                            give to its
                            > > members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                            at the helm.
                            > > > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • tomleafeater
                            Jonathan, One of Twitchell s tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                            Message 13 of 29 , Apr 8, 2010
                              Jonathan,

                              One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such things as "people should not worship the personality." But then he contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the Universe.

                              Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING, indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.

                              He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on stage.

                              Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is, for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that title.

                              Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!

                              It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but the evidence is blatantly clear.

                              Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The facts bear this out.

                              Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise. And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if I say you seem a bit conflicted.

                              But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and realize it to be what it is: A fraud.

                              Speaking for myself only,

                              Leaf

                              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Leaf,
                              >
                              > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the impression that I got.
                              >
                              > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have already posted this.
                              >
                              > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment. Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment, that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                              >
                              > Jonathan
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater" <tianyue@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Jonathan,
                              > >
                              > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression about Twitchell?
                              > >
                              > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp, and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org, PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and omniscient, capable of anything.
                              > >
                              > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                              > >
                              > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                              > >
                              > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race. Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                              > >
                              > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel through which the ECK flows. "
                              > >
                              > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > Harrison,
                              > > >
                              > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words, nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                              > > >
                              > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I already told you,
                              > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand why you have major problems with it.
                              > > >
                              > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego. They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least. There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                              > > >
                              > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical.
                              > > >
                              > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test" because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                              > > >
                              > > > The people who realize that they are their own master (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at things.
                              > > >
                              > > > Jonathan
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person, because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and rationalization.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                              > > > >
                              > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has little meaning in the West.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to back up your claims.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions, you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly. But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Harrison,
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the time to read his book.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences. They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly). So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2) you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't match what Eckankar said they should be.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it, he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there. Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible reasons.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book. I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Jonathan
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings, including the masters and the living eck master. I was really something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and threatens to upset the whole cult.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a satisfying answer.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar, I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind, Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted sense of self.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat at the helm.
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >
                            • etznab@aol.com
                              Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit Reply All the first time I sent this. ******************************************************** Searching evolution for
                              Message 14 of 29 , Apr 9, 2010
                                Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                the first time I sent this.

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

                                Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)

                                Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                (respectively), I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)

                                Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)

                                The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                1970, I believe.)

                                So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                And when did it first become associated with a person?"

                                Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                have been familiar with that term.

                                I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                association with a person might have evolved for
                                legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                know who was the head of it.

                                Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                consciousness", or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                evolved to become associated with one single
                                person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                the Eckankar organization exists at a time?

                                If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                well for history (IMO).

                                Etznab

                                -----Original Message-----
                                From: tomleafeater <tianyue@...>
                                To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                 
                                Jonathan,

                                One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                things as "people should not worship the personality." But then he
                                contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                Universe.

                                Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.

                                He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                stage.

                                Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                title.

                                Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!

                                It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                the evidence is blatantly clear.

                                Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                facts bear this out.

                                Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                I say you seem a bit conflicted.

                                But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                realize it to be what it is: A fraud.

                                Speaking for myself only,

                                Leaf

                                --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Leaf,
                                >
                                > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                impression that I got.
                                >
                                > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                already posted this.
                                >
                                > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                >
                                > Jonathan
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                                <tianyue@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > Jonathan,
                                > >
                                > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I
                                just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                about Twitchell?
                                > >
                                > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                omniscient, capable of anything.
                                > >
                                > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                > >
                                > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                > >
                                > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                > >
                                > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                through which the ECK flows. "
                                > >
                                > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                <no_reply@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > Harrison,
                                > > >
                                > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                > > >
                                > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                already told you,
                                > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                why you have major problems with it.
                                > > >
                                > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                > > >
                                > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                egotistical.
                                > > >
                                > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                > > >
                                > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                                (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                things.
                                > > >
                                > > > Jonathan
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                                <no_reply@> wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                rationalization.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                > > > >
                                > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                little meaning in the West.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to
                                back up your claims.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > Harrison,
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                time to read his book.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                                Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                reasons.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > Jonathan
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                                to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                                dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                satisfying answer.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                sense of self.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                at the helm.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > >
                                > >
                                >
                              • etznab@aol.com
                                I don t find the term mahanta used by Eckankar prior to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                Message 15 of 29 , Apr 9, 2010
                                  I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                  to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                  Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                  The large caps trademarked term MAHANTA appears
                                  to be first used in 1969.

                                  http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4003:h2lac.2.1

                                  If you go to this page

                                  http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=search&state=4003:h2lac.1.1

                                  and search for the word ECKANKAR it will bring up a list
                                  of ECK Terms. Then by clicking on the serial number you
                                  can see when that item was first used.

                                  Etznab

                                  -----Original Message-----
                                  From: etznab@...
                                  To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                  Sent: Fri, Apr 9, 2010 12:00 pm
                                  Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                  Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                   
                                  Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                  the first time I sent this.

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

                                  Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                  as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                  myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                  prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                  of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                  word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                  by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)

                                  Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                  and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                  published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                  (respectively), I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)

                                  Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                  "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                  of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                  sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                  in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)

                                  The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                  the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                  used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                  and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                  1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                  1970, I believe.)

                                  So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                  "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                  And when did it first become associated with a person?"

                                  Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                  tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                  have been familiar with that term.

                                  I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                  to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                  Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                  If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                  association with a person might have evolved for
                                  legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                  usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                  applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                  know who was the head of it.

                                  Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                  consciousness", or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                  evolved to become associated with one single
                                  person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                  the Eckankar organization exists at a time?

                                  If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                  well for history (IMO).

                                  Etznab

                                  -----Original Message-----
                                  From: tomleafeater <tianyue@...>
                                  To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                  Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                  Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                  Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                   
                                  Jonathan,

                                  One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                  or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                  things as "people should not worship the personality." But then he
                                  contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                  Universe.

                                  Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                  the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                  indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                  thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                  Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                  body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                  Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                  indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                  the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.

                                  He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                  in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                  man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                  introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                  stage.

                                  Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                  for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                  is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                  title.

                                  Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                  around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                  give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                  eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                  personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                  the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!

                                  It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                  the evidence is blatantly clear.

                                  Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                  you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                  author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                  personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                  aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                  facts bear this out.

                                  Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                  And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                  is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                  yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                  you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                  I say you seem a bit conflicted.

                                  But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                  ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                  decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                  realize it to be what it is: A fraud.

                                  Speaking for myself only,

                                  Leaf

                                  --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                  <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Leaf,
                                  >
                                  > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                  people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                  want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                  impression that I got.
                                  >
                                  > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                  because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                  know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                  was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                  already posted this.
                                  >
                                  > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                  Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                  concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                  master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                  Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                  acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                  that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                  other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                  are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                  themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                  don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                  followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                  concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                  >
                                  > Jonathan
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                                  <tianyue@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > Jonathan,
                                  > >
                                  > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                  that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                  think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I
                                  just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                  assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                  about Twitchell?
                                  > >
                                  > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                  and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                  today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                  PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                  wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                  practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                  line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                  shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                  gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                  shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                  omniscient, capable of anything.
                                  > >
                                  > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                  enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                  masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                  > >
                                  > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                  doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                  > >
                                  > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                  principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                  for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                  must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                  also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                  major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                  part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                  Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                  race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                  on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                  the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                  planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                  at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                  in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                  heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                  > >
                                  > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                  savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                  planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                  God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                  spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                  spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                  Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                  essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                  is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                  the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                  man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                  life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                  through which the ECK flows. "
                                  > >
                                  > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                  <no_reply@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Harrison,
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                  charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                  nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                  someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                  YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                  already told you,
                                  > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                  supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                  others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                  a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                  why you have major problems with it.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                  response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                  They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                  There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                  have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                  Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                  question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                  of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                  see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                  tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                  egotistical.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                  realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                  the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                  then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                  because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                                  (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                  without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                  the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                  things.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Jonathan
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                                  <no_reply@> wrote:
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                  because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                  sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                  ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                  nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                  rationalization.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                  in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                  no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                  mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                  is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                  of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                  cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                  a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                  a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                  little meaning in the West.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                  and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                  analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                  you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                  message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to
                                  back up your claims.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                  read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                  something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                  good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                  of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                  forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                  you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                  know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                  psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                  single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                  not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                  he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                  klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                  candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                  experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                  But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                  "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                  post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                  their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                  jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Harrison,
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                  I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                  telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                  Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                  a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                  time to read his book.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                  They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                  of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                  So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                  only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                  when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                  thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                  own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                  that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                  just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                  you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                  about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                  hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                  experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                  problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                  experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                  that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                  clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                  the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                  benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                  match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                                  Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                  how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                  his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                  he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                  exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                  Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                  contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                  do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                  actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                  rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                  are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                  talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                  reasons.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                  in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                  made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                  God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                  I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                  example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                  it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Jonathan
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                  harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                  amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                  my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                  including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                  something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                  the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                  throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                  in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                  narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                  characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                  that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                  pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                  rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                                  to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                  tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                  you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                  you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                  because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                  threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                                  dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                  my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                  nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                  sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                  to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                  satisfying answer.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                  morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                  has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                  ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                  couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                  matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                  I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                  what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                  a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                  words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                  writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                  this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                  plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                  Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                  imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                  metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                  too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                  of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                  had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                  take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                  sense of self.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                  least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                  an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                  people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                  diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                  give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                  at the helm.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • etznab@aol.com
                                  More information on this link. http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=73636002 ... From: etznab@aol.com To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com Sent:
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Apr 9, 2010
                                    More information on this link.

                                    http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=73636002

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: etznab@...
                                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Fri, Apr 9, 2010 4:49 pm
                                    Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                    Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                     

                                    I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                    to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                    Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                    The large caps trademarked term MAHANTA appears
                                    to be first used in 1969.

                                    http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=4003:h2lac.2.1

                                    If you go to this page

                                    http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=search&state=4003:h2lac.1.1

                                    and search for the word ECKANKAR it will bring up a list
                                    of ECK Terms. Then by clicking on the serial number you
                                    can see when that item was first used.

                                    Etznab

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: etznab@...
                                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Fri, Apr 9, 2010 12:00 pm
                                    Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                    Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                     
                                    Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                    the first time I sent this.

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

                                    Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                    as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                    myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                    prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                    of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                    word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                    by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)

                                    Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                    and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                    published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                    (respectively), I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)

                                    Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                    "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                    of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                    sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                    in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)

                                    The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                    the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                    used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                    and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                    1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                    1970, I believe.)

                                    So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                    "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                    And when did it first become associated with a person?"

                                    Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                    tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                    have been familiar with that term.

                                    I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                    to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                    Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                    If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                    association with a person might have evolved for
                                    legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                    usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                    applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                    know who was the head of it.

                                    Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                    consciousness", or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                    evolved to become associated with one single
                                    person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                    the Eckankar organization exists at a time?

                                    If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                    well for history (IMO).

                                    Etznab

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: tomleafeater <tianyue@...>
                                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                    Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                    Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                     
                                    Jonathan,

                                    One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                    or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                    things as "people should not worship the personality." But then he
                                    contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                    Universe.

                                    Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                    the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                    indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                    thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                    Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                    body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                    Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                    indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                    the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.

                                    He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                    in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                    man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                    introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                    stage.

                                    Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                    for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                    is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                    title.

                                    Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                    around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                    give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                    eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                    personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                    the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!

                                    It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                    the evidence is blatantly clear.

                                    Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                    you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                    author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                    personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                    aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                    facts bear this out.

                                    Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                    And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                    is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                    yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                    you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                    I say you seem a bit conflicted.

                                    But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                    ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                    decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                    realize it to be what it is: A fraud.

                                    Speaking for myself only,

                                    Leaf

                                    --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                    <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Leaf,
                                    >
                                    > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                    people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                    want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                    impression that I got.
                                    >
                                    > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                    because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                    know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                    was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                    already posted this.
                                    >
                                    > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                    Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                    concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                    master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                    Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                    acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                    that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                    other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                    are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                    themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                    don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                    followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                    concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                    >
                                    > Jonathan
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "tomleafeater"
                                    <tianyue@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Jonathan,
                                    > >
                                    > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                    that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                    think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical," I
                                    just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                    assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                    about Twitchell?
                                    > >
                                    > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                    and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                    today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                    PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                    wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                    practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                    line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                    shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                    gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                    shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                    omniscient, capable of anything.
                                    > >
                                    > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                    enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                    masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                    > >
                                    > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                    doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                    > >
                                    > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                    principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                    for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                    must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                    also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                    major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                    part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                    Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                    race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                    on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                    the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                    planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                    at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                    in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                    heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                    > >
                                    > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                    savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                    planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                    God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                    spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                    spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                    Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                    essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                    is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                    the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                    man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                    life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                    through which the ECK flows. "
                                    > >
                                    > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, jonathanjohns96
                                    <no_reply@> wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Harrison,
                                    > > >
                                    > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                    charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                    nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                    someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                    YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                    already told you,
                                    > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                    supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                    others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                    a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                    why you have major problems with it.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                    response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                    They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                    There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                    have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                    Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                    question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                    of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                    see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                    tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                    egotistical.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                    realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                    the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                    then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                    because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                                    (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                    without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                    the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                    things.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Jonathan
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel
                                    <no_reply@> wrote:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                    because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                    sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                    ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                    nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                    rationalization.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                    in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                    no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                    mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                    is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                    of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                    cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                    a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                    a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                    little meaning in the West.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                    and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                    analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                    you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                    message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to

                                    back up your claims.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                    read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                    something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                    good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                    of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                    forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                    you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                    know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                    psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                    single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                    not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                    he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                    klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                    candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                    experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                    But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                    "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                    post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                    their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                    jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@> wrote:
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > Harrison,
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                    I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                    telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                    Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                    a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                    time to read his book.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                    They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                    of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                    So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                    only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                    when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                    thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                    own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                    that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                    just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                    you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                    about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                    hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                    experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                    problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                    experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                    that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                    clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                    the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                    benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                    match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                                    Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                    how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                    his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                    he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                    exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                    Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                    contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                    do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                    actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                    rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                    are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                    talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                    reasons.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                    in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                    made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                    God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                    I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                    example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                    it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > Jonathan
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com,
                                    harrisonferrel <no_reply@> wrote:
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                    amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                    my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                    including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                    something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                    the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                    throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                    in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                    narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                    characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                    that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                    pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                    rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                                    to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                    tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                    you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                    you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                    because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                    threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                                    dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                    my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                    nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                    sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                    to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                    satisfying answer.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                    morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                    has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                    ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                    couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                    matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                    I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                    what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                    a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                    words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                    writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                    this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                    plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                    Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                    imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                    metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                    too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                    of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                    had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                    take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                    sense of self.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                    least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                    an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                    people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                    diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                    give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                    at the helm.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  • thomas lee
                                    Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to create new terms for his new religion. He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Apr 9, 2010
                                      Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to create new terms for his new religion.
                                      He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma.    The word Mahatma means great soul.   It was used by Theosophy to describe a highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of individuals.  A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master. 


                                      From: "etznab@..." <etznab@...>
                                      To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                      Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                      Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                       

                                      Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                      the first time I sent this.

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

                                      Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                      as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                      myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                      prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                      of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                      word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                      by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)

                                      Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                      and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                      published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                      (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)

                                      Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                      "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                      of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                      sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                      in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)

                                      The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                      the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                      used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                      and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                      1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                      1970, I believe.)

                                      So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                      "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                      And when did it first become associated with a person?"

                                      Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                      tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                      have been familiar with that term.

                                      I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                      to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                      Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?

                                      If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                      association with a person might have evolved for
                                      legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                      usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                      applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                      know who was the head of it.

                                      Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                      consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                      evolved to become associated with one single
                                      person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                      the Eckankar organization exists at a time?

                                      If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                      well for history (IMO).

                                      Etznab

                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: tomleafeater <tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                      To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                      Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                      Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                      Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                       
                                      Jonathan,

                                      One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                      or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                      things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then he
                                      contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                      Universe.

                                      Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                      the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                      indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                      thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                      Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                      body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                      Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                      indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                      the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.

                                      He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                      in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                      man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                      introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                      stage.

                                      Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                      for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                      is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                      title.

                                      Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                      around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                      give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                      eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                      personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                      the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!

                                      It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                      the evidence is blatantly clear.

                                      Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                      you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                      author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                      personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                      aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                      facts bear this out.

                                      Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                      And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                      is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                      yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                      you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                      I say you seem a bit conflicted.

                                      But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                      ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                      decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                      realize it to be what it is: A fraud.

                                      Speaking for myself only,

                                      Leaf

                                      --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                      &lt;no_reply@ ...&gt; wrote:
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; Leaf,
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                      people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                      want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                      impression that I got.
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                      because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                      know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                      was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                      already posted this.
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                      Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                      concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                      master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                      Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                      acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                      that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                      other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                      are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                      themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                      don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                      followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                      concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; Jonathan
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt;
                                      &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                      &lt;tianyue@ &gt; wrote:
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; Jonathan,
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                      that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                      think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, " I
                                      just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                      assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                      about Twitchell?
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                      and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                      today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                      PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                      wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                      practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                      line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                      shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                      gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                      shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                      omniscient, capable of anything.
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                      enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                      masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                      doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                      principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                      for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                      must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                      also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                      major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                      part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                      Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                      race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                      on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                      the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                      planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                      at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                      in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                      heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                      savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                      planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                      God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                      spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                      spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                      Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                      essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                      is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                      the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                      man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                      life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                      through which the ECK flows. "
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                      &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                      charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                      nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                      someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                      YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                      already told you,
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                      supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                      others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                      a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                      why you have major problems with it.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                      response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                      They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                      There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                      have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                      Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                      question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                      of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                      see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                      tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                      egotistical.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                      realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                      the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                      then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                      because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; The people who realize that they are their own master
                                      (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                      without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                      the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                      things.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, harrisonferrel
                                      &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                      because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                      sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                      ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                      nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                      rationalization.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                      in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                      no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                      mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                      is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                      of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                      cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                      a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                      a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                      little meaning in the West.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                      and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                      analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                      you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                      message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to
                                      back up your claims.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                      read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                      something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                      good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                      of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                      forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                      you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                      know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                      psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                      single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                      not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                      he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                      klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                      candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                      experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                      But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                      "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                      post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                      their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                      jonathanjohns96 &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                      I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                      telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                      Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                      a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                      time to read his book.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                      They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                      of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                      So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                      only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                      when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                      thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                      own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                      that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                      just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                      you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From this point on I am no longer talking
                                      about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                      hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                      experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                      problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                      experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                      that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                      clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                      the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                      benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                      match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I still remember something that I read on the
                                      Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                      how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                      his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                      he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                      exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                      Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So lots of people have inner experiences
                                      contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                      do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                      actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                      rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                      are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                      talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                      reasons.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                      in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                      made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                      God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                      I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                      example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                      it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                      harrisonferrel &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                      amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                      my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                      including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                      something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                      the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                      throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                      in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                      narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                      characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                      that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                      pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                      rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When you have experiences that show you
                                      to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                      tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                      you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                      you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                      because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                      threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I've come to see past lives and all other
                                      dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                      my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                      nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                      sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                      to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                      satisfying answer.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                      morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                      has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                      ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                      couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                      matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                      I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                      what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                      a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                      words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                      writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                      this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                      plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Serious delving into the human mind,
                                      Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                      imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                      metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                      too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                      of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                      had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                      take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                      sense of self.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                      least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                      an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                      people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                      diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                      give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                      at the helm.
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt; &gt;
                                      &gt;


                                    • yoga_nidra
                                      ... Twitchell didn t coin the term mahanta, as it s a sanskrit word that means grand. Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though Twitchell s use
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Apr 16, 2010
                                        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee <thomaslee40@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to create new terms for his new religion.
                                        > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma. The word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to describe a highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.

                                        Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word that means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is something he himself came up with.

                                        Mahanta can also be a name.

                                        http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html

                                        Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters, a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.

                                        http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157


                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > ________________________________
                                        > From: "etznab@..." <etznab@...>
                                        > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                        > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                        > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                        > the first time I sent this.
                                        >
                                        > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                        >
                                        > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                        > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                        > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                        > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                        > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                        > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                        > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                        >
                                        > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                        > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                        > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                        > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                        >
                                        > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                        > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                        > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                        > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                        > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                        >
                                        > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                        > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                        > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                        > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                        > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                        > 1970, I believe.)
                                        >
                                        > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                        > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                        > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                        >
                                        > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                        > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                        > have been familiar with that term.
                                        >
                                        > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                        > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                        > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                        >
                                        > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                        > association with a person might have evolved for
                                        > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                        > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                        > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                        > know who was the head of it.
                                        >
                                        > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                        > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                        > evolved to become associated with one single
                                        > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                        > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                        >
                                        > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                        > well for history (IMO).
                                        >
                                        > Etznab
                                        >
                                        > -----Original Message-----
                                        > From: tomleafeater <tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                        > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                        > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                        > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                        > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Jonathan,
                                        >
                                        > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                        > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                        > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then he
                                        > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                        > Universe.
                                        >
                                        > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                        > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                        > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                        > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                        > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                        > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                        > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                        > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                        > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                        >
                                        > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                        > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                        > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                        > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                        > stage.
                                        >
                                        > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                        > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                        > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                        > title.
                                        >
                                        > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                        > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                        > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                        > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                        > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                        > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                        >
                                        > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                        > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                        >
                                        > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                        > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                        > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                        > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                        > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                        > facts bear this out.
                                        >
                                        > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                        > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                        > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                        > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                        > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                        > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                        >
                                        > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                        > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                        > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                        > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                        >
                                        > Speaking for myself only,
                                        >
                                        > Leaf
                                        >
                                        > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                        > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Leaf,
                                        > >
                                        > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                        > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                        > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                        > impression that I got.
                                        > >
                                        > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                        > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                        > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                        > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                        > already posted this.
                                        > >
                                        > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                        > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                        > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                        > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                        > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                        > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                        > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                        > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                        > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                        > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                        > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                        > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                        > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                        > >
                                        > > Jonathan
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                        > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Jonathan,
                                        > > >
                                        > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                        > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                        > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, " I
                                        > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                        > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                        > about Twitchell?
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                        > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                        > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                        > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                        > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                        > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                        > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                        > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                        > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                        > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                        > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                        > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                        > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                        > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                        > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                        > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                        > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                        > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                        > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                        > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                        > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                        > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                        > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                        > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                        > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                        > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                        > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                        > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                        > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                        > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                        > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                        > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                        > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                        > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                        > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                        > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                        > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                        > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                        > life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                        > through which the ECK flows. "
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                        > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Harrison,
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                        > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                        > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                        > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                        > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                        > already told you,
                                        > > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                        > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                        > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                        > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                        > why you have major problems with it.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                        > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                        > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                        > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                        > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                        > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                        > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                        > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                        > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                        > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                        > egotistical.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                        > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                        > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                        > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                        > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                                        > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                        > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                        > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                        > things.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Jonathan
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, harrisonferrel
                                        > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                        > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                        > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                        > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                        > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                        > rationalization.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                        > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                        > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                        > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                        > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                        > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                        > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                        > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                        > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                        > little meaning in the West.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                        > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                        > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                        > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                        > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to
                                        > back up your claims.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                        > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                        > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                        > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                        > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                        > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                        > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                        > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                        > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                        > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                        > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                        > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                        > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                        > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                        > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                        > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                        > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                        > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                        > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                        > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > Harrison,
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                        > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                        > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                        > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                        > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                        > time to read his book.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                        > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                        > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                        > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                        > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                        > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                        > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                        > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                        > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                        > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                        > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                        > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                        > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                        > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                        > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                        > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                        > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                        > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                        > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                        > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                        > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                                        > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                        > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                        > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                        > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                        > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                        > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                        > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                        > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                        > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                        > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                        > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                        > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                        > reasons.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                        > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                        > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                        > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                        > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                        > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                        > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > Jonathan
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                        > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                        > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                        > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                        > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                        > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                        > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                        > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                        > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                        > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                        > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                        > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                        > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                        > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                                        > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                        > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                        > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                        > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                        > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                        > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                                        > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                        > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                        > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                        > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                        > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                        > satisfying answer.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                        > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                        > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                        > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                        > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                        > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                        > I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                        > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                        > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                        > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                        > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                        > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                        > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                        > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                        > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                        > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                        > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                        > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                        > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                        > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                        > sense of self.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                        > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                        > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                        > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                        > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                        > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                        > at the helm.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • etznab@aol.com
                                        Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson s The Path of the Masters, a book Twitchell was
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Apr 16, 2010
                                          "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                          Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                          is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                          a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."

                                          A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                          not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                          that book - The Path of the Masters.

                                          (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                          in POTM, please cite page number.)

                                          Here is something else to consider about the
                                          knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                          its formative stages.

                                          A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:

                                          "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                          on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                          them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                          to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                          basically much of the material is good because
                                          it is copied. [....]"

                                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankarhistory/message/1434

                                          What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                          president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                          familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                          when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                          was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                          years!

                                          "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                          that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                          joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                          as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                          rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue

                                          [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]

                                          http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/9a1844ccb34936ef?hl=en#

                                          BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                          publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                          or 1969.

                                          In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                          in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                          Notes.

                                          For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                          became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                          was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".

                                          The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                          appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                          tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                          marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                          later 60s.

                                          Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                          Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                          on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                          mahatmas into four classes:"

                                          The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                          sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.

                                          Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                          used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                          synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                          word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                          to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                          it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                          also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                          word, in my opinion.

                                          The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                          has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                          Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                          it looks like each group became partial to one
                                          term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                          generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                          used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                          research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                          for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                          sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.

                                          Etznab

                                          -----Original Message-----
                                          From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                          To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                          Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                          Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                          Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                           


                                          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee
                                          <thomaslee40@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to
                                          create new terms for his new religion.
                                          > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma. The
                                          word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to describe a
                                          highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                          individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.

                                          Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word that
                                          means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though
                                          Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                          something he himself came up with.

                                          Mahanta can also be a name.

                                          http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html

                                          Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian
                                          Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters, a
                                          book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.

                                          http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157

                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > ________________________________
                                          > From: "etznab@..." <etznab@...>
                                          > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                          > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                          > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                          Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                          > the first time I sent this.
                                          >
                                          > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                          >
                                          > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                          > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                          > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                          > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                          > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                          > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                          > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                          >
                                          > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                          > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                          > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                          > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                          >
                                          > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                          > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                          > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                          > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                          > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                          >
                                          > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                          > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                          > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                          > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                          > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                          > 1970, I believe.)
                                          >
                                          > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                          > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                          > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                          >
                                          > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                          > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                          > have been familiar with that term.
                                          >
                                          > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                          > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                          > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                          >
                                          > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                          > association with a person might have evolved for
                                          > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                          > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                          > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                          > know who was the head of it.
                                          >
                                          > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                          > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                          > evolved to become associated with one single
                                          > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                          > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                          >
                                          > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                          > well for history (IMO).
                                          >
                                          > Etznab
                                          >
                                          > -----Original Message-----
                                          > From: tomleafeater <tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                          > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                          > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                          > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                          Maybe.
                                          > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Jonathan,
                                          >
                                          > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                          principles
                                          > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed
                                          such
                                          > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then
                                          he
                                          > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of
                                          the
                                          > Universe.
                                          >
                                          > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                          referred to
                                          > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                          > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he
                                          is
                                          > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the
                                          Living
                                          > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not
                                          the
                                          > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                          > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                          > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality)
                                          and on
                                          > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                          >
                                          > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                          dissonance
                                          > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him,
                                          the
                                          > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                          > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                          > stage.
                                          >
                                          > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth
                                          is,
                                          > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                          title, and
                                          > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with
                                          that
                                          > title.
                                          >
                                          > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is
                                          built
                                          > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                          either
                                          > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you
                                          out of
                                          > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                          > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                          remove
                                          > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                          >
                                          > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this,
                                          but
                                          > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                          >
                                          > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it
                                          for
                                          > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                          > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the
                                          chief
                                          > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                          tactics
                                          > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                          > facts bear this out.
                                          >
                                          > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                          otherwise.
                                          > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                          because it
                                          > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't
                                          "concern
                                          > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where
                                          do
                                          > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon
                                          me if
                                          > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                          >
                                          > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're
                                          not
                                          > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the
                                          final
                                          > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                          relationship, and
                                          > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                          >
                                          > Speaking for myself only,
                                          >
                                          > Leaf
                                          >
                                          > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                          > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > Leaf,
                                          > >
                                          > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized
                                          that
                                          > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he
                                          didn't
                                          > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is
                                          the
                                          > impression that I got.
                                          > >
                                          > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post
                                          them
                                          > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I
                                          don't
                                          > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                          someone who
                                          > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may
                                          have
                                          > already posted this.
                                          > >
                                          > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                          > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                          > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our
                                          own
                                          > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                          unfoldment.
                                          > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                          > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                          unfoldment,
                                          > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all
                                          the
                                          > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like
                                          they
                                          > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look
                                          at
                                          > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                          > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than
                                          their
                                          > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                          should be
                                          > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                          > >
                                          > > Jonathan
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                          > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Jonathan,
                                          > > >
                                          > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you
                                          have
                                          > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                          > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, "
                                          I
                                          > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive,
                                          your
                                          > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                          impression
                                          > about Twitchell?
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                          Klemp,
                                          > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                          > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the
                                          org,
                                          > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full
                                          size
                                          > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum.
                                          People
                                          > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand
                                          in
                                          > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                          > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and
                                          would
                                          > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                          > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                          > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or
                                          was
                                          > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                          > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                          > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                          > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                          responsible
                                          > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same
                                          time, He
                                          > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                          faiths are
                                          > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at
                                          the
                                          > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind
                                          as
                                          > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human
                                          race.
                                          > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the
                                          human
                                          > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of
                                          life
                                          > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities
                                          within
                                          > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                          > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                          light-hearted
                                          > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is
                                          ever
                                          > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest
                                          His
                                          > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                          universes.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                          world
                                          > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                          > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds
                                          of
                                          > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with,
                                          but the
                                          > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                          > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the
                                          ECK
                                          > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                          spiritual
                                          > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                          Mercy, He
                                          > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which
                                          is
                                          > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in
                                          every
                                          > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                          > life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                          > through which the ECK flows. "
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                          > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Harrison,
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are
                                          in
                                          > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other
                                          words,
                                          > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility
                                          to
                                          > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                          because
                                          > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                          > already told you,
                                          > > > > when you realize that you are your own master
                                          you're not
                                          > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                          > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you
                                          that
                                          > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                          understand
                                          > why you have major problems with it.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                          > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any
                                          ego.
                                          > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                          least.
                                          > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                          reported to
                                          > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question."
                                          The
                                          > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask
                                          your
                                          > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme
                                          worship
                                          > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy
                                          to
                                          > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried
                                          to
                                          > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become
                                          more
                                          > egotistical.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am
                                          God
                                          > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                          worshiping
                                          > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                          realized" and
                                          > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the
                                          test"
                                          > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > The people who realize that they are their own
                                          master
                                          > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their
                                          own
                                          > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have
                                          "passed
                                          > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking
                                          at
                                          > things.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Jonathan
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                          harrisonferrel
                                          > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a
                                          person,
                                          > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your
                                          reply
                                          > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                          > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                          > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions
                                          and
                                          > rationalization.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are
                                          blue
                                          > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                          based on
                                          > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that
                                          the
                                          > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not,
                                          there
                                          > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                          workings
                                          > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                          "Sometimes a
                                          > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything
                                          close to
                                          > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or
                                          she is
                                          > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It
                                          has
                                          > little meaning in the West.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of
                                          images
                                          > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                          > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                          canvas. If
                                          > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                          > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence
                                          to
                                          > back up your claims.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the
                                          time I
                                          > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                          > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't
                                          very
                                          > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far
                                          more out
                                          > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                          > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                          overtones.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and
                                          visions,
                                          > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you
                                          don't
                                          > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                          > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on
                                          a
                                          > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do.
                                          It's
                                          > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess
                                          that
                                          > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                          > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                          > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                          > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                          folly.
                                          > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery
                                          or
                                          > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                          original
                                          > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people
                                          of
                                          > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                          truth.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                          > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Harrison,
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were
                                          real. And
                                          > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                          > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that
                                          Ford
                                          > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only
                                          because
                                          > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not
                                          had the
                                          > time to read his book.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > So getting back to your inner
                                          experiences.
                                          > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this
                                          type
                                          > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                          mildly).
                                          > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                          > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the
                                          time
                                          > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                          about one
                                          > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are
                                          your
                                          > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1)
                                          think
                                          > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It
                                          was
                                          > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny
                                          and (2)
                                          > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                          > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                          discussion.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                          > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                          > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way.
                                          The
                                          > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                          > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse
                                          than
                                          > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally
                                          have no
                                          > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going
                                          on is
                                          > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to
                                          the
                                          > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                          didn't
                                          > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on
                                          the
                                          > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story
                                          about
                                          > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly
                                          left
                                          > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put
                                          it,
                                          > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                          > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you
                                          there.
                                          > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                          > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when
                                          they
                                          > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think
                                          it is
                                          > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it
                                          is
                                          > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                          people
                                          > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                          specifically
                                          > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                          > reasons.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the
                                          books
                                          > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                          experiences
                                          > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone
                                          Of
                                          > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck
                                          book.
                                          > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                          another
                                          > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you
                                          know
                                          > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Jonathan
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                          > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                          completely
                                          > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                          contents of
                                          > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                          > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                          > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms
                                          that
                                          > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                          > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major
                                          events
                                          > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of
                                          thing?
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person,
                                          a
                                          > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of
                                          deranged
                                          > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little
                                          bell
                                          > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded
                                          nutjob
                                          > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                          > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                          un-believe-able.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show
                                          you
                                          > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                          quick to
                                          > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap.
                                          When
                                          > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do
                                          with
                                          > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares
                                          them
                                          > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                          > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all
                                          other
                                          > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of
                                          much of
                                          > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                          > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with
                                          any
                                          > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would
                                          want
                                          > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                          > satisfying answer.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell
                                          or
                                          > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind.
                                          It
                                          > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed,
                                          years
                                          > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                          > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                          > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with
                                          eckankar,
                                          > I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation
                                          for
                                          > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                          eckankar, as
                                          > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions
                                          for old
                                          > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in
                                          the
                                          > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people
                                          in
                                          > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                          innumerable
                                          > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                          > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                          > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                          > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging,
                                          (and in
                                          > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories,"
                                          out
                                          > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold
                                          klemp
                                          > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he
                                          would
                                          > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                          distorted
                                          > sense of self.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                          > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult
                                          with
                                          > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                          better
                                          > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with
                                          the
                                          > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good
                                          to
                                          > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and
                                          cheat
                                          > at the helm.
                                          > > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                        • David Osborn
                                          Dear Tianyue,      That s quite an interesting bit of Eckankar history there!  And who knows what other juicy morsels could also be uncovered with a
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Apr 16, 2010
                                            Dear Tianyue,
                                                 That's quite an interesting bit of Eckankar history there!  And who knows what other juicy morsels could also be uncovered with a little digging and research.
                                                 I know that the word Mahanta sounds a lot like Mahatma, but I don't think that Paulji confused the two words.  You see, when I was doing some independent research on Kabir, who Eckankar claims to be in their lineage of Eck Masters, I ran across a little known sect called the Kabir Panthis, who were the followers of Kabir's teachings.  They called their guru or leader a Mahanta, which kind of means the head of the ashram.  I hope that that clarifies things a bit.
                                                                                             Sincerely,
                                                                                                 David 

                                            --- On Fri, 4/16/10, etznab@... <etznab@...> wrote:

                                            From: etznab@... <etznab@...>
                                            Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                            To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                            Date: Friday, April 16, 2010, 3:25 PM


                                            "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                            Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                            is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                            a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."

                                            A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                            not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                            that book - The Path of the Masters.

                                            (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                            in POTM, please cite page number.)

                                            Here is something else to consider about the
                                            knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                            its formative stages.

                                            A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:

                                            "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                            on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                            them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                            to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                            basically much of the material is good because
                                            it is copied. [....]"

                                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankarhistory/message/1434

                                            What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                            president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                            familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                            when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                            was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                            years!

                                            "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                            that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                            joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                            as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                            rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue

                                            [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]

                                            http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/9a1844ccb34936ef?hl=en#

                                            BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                            publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                            or 1969.

                                            In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                            in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                            Notes.

                                            For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                            became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                            was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".

                                            The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                            appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                            tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                            marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                            later 60s.

                                            Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                            Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                            on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                            mahatmas into four classes:"

                                            The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                            sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.

                                            Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                            used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                            synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                            word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                            to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                            it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                            also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                            word, in my opinion.

                                            The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                            has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                            Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                            it looks like each group became partial to one
                                            term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                            generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                            used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                            research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                            for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                            sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.

                                            Etznab

                                            -----Original Message-----
                                            From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                            To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                            Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                            Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                            Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                             


                                            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee
                                            &lt;thomaslee40@...&gt; wrote:
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to
                                            create new terms for his new religion.
                                            &gt; He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma.    The
                                            word Mahatma means great soul.   It was used by Theosophy to describe a
                                            highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                            individuals.  A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.

                                            Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word that
                                            means "grand."  Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though
                                            Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                            something he himself came up with.

                                            Mahanta can also be a name.

                                            http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html

                                            Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?  Most likely from Julian
                                            Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters, a
                                            book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.

                                            http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157

                                            &gt;
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; ________________________________
                                            &gt; From: "etznab@..." &lt;etznab@...&gt;
                                            &gt; To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                            &gt; Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                            &gt; Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                            Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                            &gt; the first time I sent this.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                            &gt; as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                            &gt; myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                            &gt; prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                            &gt; of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                            &gt; word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                            &gt; by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                            &gt; and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                            &gt; published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                            &gt; (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                            &gt; "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                            &gt; of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                            &gt; sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                            &gt; in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                            &gt; the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                            &gt; used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                            &gt; and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                            &gt; 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                            &gt; 1970, I believe.)
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                            &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                            &gt; And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                            &gt; tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                            &gt; have been familiar with that term.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                            &gt; to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                            &gt; Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                            &gt; association with a person might have evolved for
                                            &gt; legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                            &gt; usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                            &gt; applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                            &gt; know who was the head of it.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                            &gt; consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                            &gt; evolved to become associated with one single
                                            &gt; person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                            &gt; the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                            &gt; well for history (IMO).
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Etznab
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; -----Original Message-----
                                            &gt; From: tomleafeater &lt;tianyue@earthlink. net&gt;
                                            &gt; To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                            &gt; Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                            &gt; Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                            Maybe.
                                            &gt; Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Jonathan,
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                            principles
                                            &gt; or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed
                                            such
                                            &gt; things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then
                                            he
                                            &gt; contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of
                                            the
                                            &gt; Universe.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                            referred to
                                            &gt; the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                            &gt; indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he
                                            is
                                            &gt; thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the
                                            Living
                                            &gt; Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not
                                            the
                                            &gt; body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                            &gt; Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                            &gt; indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality)
                                            and on
                                            &gt; the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                            dissonance
                                            &gt; in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him,
                                            the
                                            &gt; man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                            &gt; introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                            &gt; stage.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth
                                            is,
                                            &gt; for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                            title, and
                                            &gt; is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with
                                            that
                                            &gt; title.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is
                                            built
                                            &gt; around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                            either
                                            &gt; give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you
                                            out of
                                            &gt; eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                            &gt; personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                            remove
                                            &gt; the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this,
                                            but
                                            &gt; the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it
                                            for
                                            &gt; you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                            &gt; author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the
                                            chief
                                            &gt; personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                            tactics
                                            &gt; aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                            &gt; facts bear this out.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                            otherwise.
                                            &gt; And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                            because it
                                            &gt; is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't
                                            "concern
                                            &gt; yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where
                                            do
                                            &gt; you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon
                                            me if
                                            &gt; I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're
                                            not
                                            &gt; ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the
                                            final
                                            &gt; decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                            relationship, and
                                            &gt; realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Speaking for myself only,
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; Leaf
                                            &gt;
                                            &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                            &gt; &lt;no_reply@ ...&gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; Leaf,
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized
                                            that
                                            &gt; people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he
                                            didn't
                                            &gt; want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is
                                            the
                                            &gt; impression that I got.
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post
                                            them
                                            &gt; because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I
                                            don't
                                            &gt; know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                            someone who
                                            &gt; was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may
                                            have
                                            &gt; already posted this.
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                            &gt; Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                            &gt; concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our
                                            own
                                            &gt; master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                            unfoldment.
                                            &gt; Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                            &gt; acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                            unfoldment,
                                            &gt; that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all
                                            the
                                            &gt; other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like
                                            they
                                            &gt; are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look
                                            at
                                            &gt; themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                            &gt; don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than
                                            their
                                            &gt; followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                            should be
                                            &gt; concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                            &gt; &lt;tianyue@ &gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan,
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you
                                            have
                                            &gt; that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                            &gt; think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, "
                                            I
                                            &gt; just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive,
                                            your
                                            &gt; assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                            impression
                                            &gt; about Twitchell?
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                            Klemp,
                                            &gt; and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                            &gt; today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the
                                            org,
                                            &gt; PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full
                                            size
                                            &gt; wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum.
                                            People
                                            &gt; practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand
                                            in
                                            &gt; line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                            &gt; shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and
                                            would
                                            &gt; gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                            &gt; shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                            &gt; omniscient, capable of anything.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or
                                            was
                                            &gt; enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                            &gt; masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                            &gt; doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                            &gt; principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                            responsible
                                            &gt; for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same
                                            time, He
                                            &gt; must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                            faiths are
                                            &gt; also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at
                                            the
                                            &gt; major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind
                                            as
                                            &gt; part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human
                                            race.
                                            &gt; Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the
                                            human
                                            &gt; race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of
                                            life
                                            &gt; on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities
                                            within
                                            &gt; the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                            &gt; planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                            light-hearted
                                            &gt; at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is
                                            ever
                                            &gt; in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest
                                            His
                                            &gt; heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                            universes.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                            world
                                            &gt; savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                            &gt; planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds
                                            of
                                            &gt; God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with,
                                            but the
                                            &gt; spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                            &gt; spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the
                                            ECK
                                            &gt; Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                            spiritual
                                            &gt; essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                            Mercy, He
                                            &gt; is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which
                                            is
                                            &gt; the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in
                                            every
                                            &gt; man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                            &gt; life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                            &gt; through which the ECK flows. "
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                            &gt; &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are
                                            in
                                            &gt; charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other
                                            words,
                                            &gt; nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility
                                            to
                                            &gt; someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                            because
                                            &gt; YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                            &gt; already told you,
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; when you realize that you are your own master
                                            you're not
                                            &gt; supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                            &gt; others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you
                                            that
                                            &gt; a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                            understand
                                            &gt; why you have major problems with it.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                            &gt; response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any
                                            ego.
                                            &gt; They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                            least.
                                            &gt; There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                            reported to
                                            &gt; have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question."
                                            The
                                            &gt; Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask
                                            your
                                            &gt; question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Actually, it is the East where the most extreme
                                            worship
                                            &gt; of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy
                                            to
                                            &gt; see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried
                                            to
                                            &gt; tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become
                                            more
                                            &gt; egotistical.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am
                                            God
                                            &gt; realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                            worshiping
                                            &gt; the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                            realized" and
                                            &gt; then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the
                                            test"
                                            &gt; because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The people who realize that they are their own
                                            master
                                            &gt; (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their
                                            own
                                            &gt; without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have
                                            "passed
                                            &gt; the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking
                                            at
                                            &gt; things.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                            harrisonferrel
                                            &gt; &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a
                                            person,
                                            &gt; because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your
                                            reply
                                            &gt; sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                            &gt; ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                            &gt; nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions
                                            and
                                            &gt; rationalization.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We can rationalize "experiences" until we are
                                            blue
                                            &gt; in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                            based on
                                            &gt; no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that
                                            the
                                            &gt; mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not,
                                            there
                                            &gt; is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                            workings
                                            &gt; of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                            "Sometimes a
                                            &gt; cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I am not a master of anything or anything
                                            close to
                                            &gt; a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or
                                            she is
                                            &gt; a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It
                                            has
                                            &gt; little meaning in the West.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; My mind is capable of creating a plethora of
                                            images
                                            &gt; and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                            &gt; analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                            canvas. If
                                            &gt; you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                            &gt; message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence
                                            to
                                            &gt; back up your claims.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the
                                            time I
                                            &gt; read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                            &gt; something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't
                                            very
                                            &gt; good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far
                                            more out
                                            &gt; of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                            &gt; forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                            overtones.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From your analysis of my experiences and
                                            visions,
                                            &gt; you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you
                                            don't
                                            &gt; know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                            &gt; psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on
                                            a
                                            &gt; single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do.
                                            It's
                                            &gt; not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess
                                            that
                                            &gt; he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                            &gt; klemp's  program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                            &gt; candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                            &gt; experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                            folly.
                                            &gt; But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery
                                            or
                                            &gt; "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                            original
                                            &gt; post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar does a good job at relieving people
                                            of
                                            &gt; their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                            truth.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                            &gt; jonathanjohns96 &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I believe you inner experiences were
                                            real. And
                                            &gt; I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                            &gt; telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that
                                            Ford
                                            &gt; Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only
                                            because
                                            &gt; a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not
                                            had the
                                            &gt; time to read his book.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So getting back to your inner
                                            experiences.
                                            &gt; They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this
                                            type
                                            &gt; of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                            mildly).
                                            &gt; So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                            &gt; only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the
                                            time
                                            &gt; when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                            about one
                                            &gt; thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are
                                            your
                                            &gt; own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1)
                                            think
                                            &gt; that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It
                                            was
                                            &gt; just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny
                                            and (2)
                                            &gt; you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From this point on I am no longer talking
                                            &gt; about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                            discussion.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                            &gt; hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                            &gt; experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way.
                                            The
                                            &gt; problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                            &gt; experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse
                                            than
                                            &gt; that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally
                                            have no
                                            &gt; clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going
                                            on is
                                            &gt; the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to
                                            the
                                            &gt; benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                            didn't
                                            &gt; match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I still remember something that I read on
                                            the
                                            &gt; Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story
                                            about
                                            &gt; how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly
                                            left
                                            &gt; his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put
                                            it,
                                            &gt; he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                            &gt; exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you
                                            there.
                                            &gt; Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So lots of people have inner experiences
                                            &gt; contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when
                                            they
                                            &gt; do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think
                                            it is
                                            &gt; actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it
                                            is
                                            &gt; rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                            people
                                            &gt; are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                            specifically
                                            &gt; talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                            &gt; reasons.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I once told a fellow member that all the
                                            books
                                            &gt; in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                            experiences
                                            &gt; made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone
                                            Of
                                            &gt; God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck
                                            book.
                                            &gt; I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                            another
                                            &gt; example of somebody having different experiences, and before you
                                            know
                                            &gt; it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                            &gt; harrisonferrel &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                            completely
                                            &gt; amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                            contents of
                                            &gt; my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                            &gt; including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                            &gt; something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms
                                            that
                                            &gt; the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                            &gt; throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major
                                            events
                                            &gt; in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So what do you do with this kind of
                                            thing?
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Luckily, I am not a deluded person,
                                            a
                                            &gt; narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of
                                            deranged
                                            &gt; characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little
                                            bell
                                            &gt; that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded
                                            nutjob
                                            &gt; pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                            &gt; rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                            un-believe-able.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When you have experiences that show
                                            you
                                            &gt; to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                            quick to
                                            &gt; tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap.
                                            When
                                            &gt; you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do
                                            with
                                            &gt; you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares
                                            them
                                            &gt; because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                            &gt; threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I've come to see past lives and all
                                            other
                                            &gt; dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of
                                            much of
                                            &gt; my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                            &gt; nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with
                                            any
                                            &gt; sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would
                                            want
                                            &gt; to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                            &gt; satisfying answer.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Why people believe klemp, twitchell
                                            or
                                            &gt; morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind.
                                            It
                                            &gt; has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed,
                                            years
                                            &gt; ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                            &gt; couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                            &gt; matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Following my 12 year stint with
                                            eckankar,
                                            &gt; I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation
                                            for
                                            &gt; what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                            eckankar, as
                                            &gt; a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions
                                            for old
                                            &gt; words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in
                                            the
                                            &gt; writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people
                                            in
                                            &gt; this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                            innumerable
                                            &gt; plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Serious delving into the human mind,
                                            &gt; Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                            &gt; imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                            &gt; metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging,
                                            (and in
                                            &gt; too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories,"
                                            out
                                            &gt; of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I can only imagine that if harold
                                            klemp
                                            &gt; had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he
                                            would
                                            &gt; take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                            distorted
                                            &gt; sense of self.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                            &gt; least, for anybody, especially those like  us who entered the cult
                                            with
                                            &gt; an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                            better
                                            &gt; people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with
                                            the
                                            &gt; diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good
                                            to
                                            &gt; give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and
                                            cheat
                                            &gt; at the helm.
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt; &gt;
                                            &gt;


                                                         




                                            ------------------------------------

                                            Yahoo! Groups Links

                                            <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                                            <*> Your email settings:
                                                Individual Email | Traditional

                                            <*> To change settings online go to:
                                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                                                (Yahoo! ID required)

                                            <*> To change settings via email:
                                                eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                                                eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                                            <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                            <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                                          • yoga_nidra
                                            ... I don t know for sure either, I was taking the word of the website I cited. Here is something David Lane wrote: When Twitchell first started writing about
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Apr 16, 2010
                                              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                              > Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                              > is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                              > a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."
                                              >
                                              > A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                              > not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                              > that book - The Path of the Masters.

                                              I don't know for sure either, I was taking the word of the website I cited.

                                              Here is something David Lane wrote:

                                              "When Twitchell first started writing about Eckankar he more or less used terminology which was based upon shabd yoga. However, he quickly began to take on terms which were not in Radhasoami literature and incorporate them into the larger theology of Eckankar, as witnessed in The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad. In so doing he made Eckankar an eclectic teaching, even though its major emphasis was Indian in origin. The term Mahanta is a case in point. Although the term usually translates as "one who is in charge of a temple" or "head of an ashram," Twitchell utilized it as meaning: "The Living Eck Master.""

                                              http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html


                                              >
                                              > (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                              > in POTM, please cite page number.)
                                              >
                                              > Here is something else to consider about the
                                              > knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                              > its formative stages.
                                              >
                                              > A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:
                                              >
                                              > "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                              > on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                              > them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                              > to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                              > basically much of the material is good because
                                              > it is copied. [....]"
                                              >
                                              > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankarhistory/message/1434
                                              >
                                              > What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                              > president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                              > familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                              > when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                              > was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                              > years!
                                              >
                                              > "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                              > that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                              > joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                              > as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                              > rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue
                                              >
                                              > [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]
                                              >
                                              > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/9a1844ccb34936ef?hl=en#
                                              >
                                              > BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                              > publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                              > or 1969.
                                              >
                                              > In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                              > in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                              > Notes.
                                              >
                                              > For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                              > became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                              > was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".
                                              >
                                              > The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                              > appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                              > tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                              > marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                              > later 60s.
                                              >
                                              > Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                              > Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                              > on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                              > mahatmas into four classes:"
                                              >
                                              > The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                              > sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.
                                              >
                                              > Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                              > used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                              > synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                              > word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                              > to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                              > it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                              > also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                              > word, in my opinion.
                                              >
                                              > The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                              > has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                              > Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                              > it looks like each group became partial to one
                                              > term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                              > generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                              > used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                              > research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                              > for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                              > sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.
                                              >
                                              > Etznab
                                              >
                                              > -----Original Message-----
                                              > From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                              > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                              > Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                              > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                              > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                              >
                                              >  
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee
                                              > thomaslee40@ wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to
                                              > create new terms for his new religion.
                                              > > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma. The
                                              > word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to describe a
                                              > highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                              > individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.
                                              >
                                              > Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word that
                                              > means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though
                                              > Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                              > something he himself came up with.
                                              >
                                              > Mahanta can also be a name.
                                              >
                                              > http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html
                                              >
                                              > Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian
                                              > Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters, a
                                              > book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.
                                              >
                                              > http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157
                                              >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > ________________________________
                                              > > From: "etznab@" etznab@
                                              > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                              > > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                              > > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                              > Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                              > > the first time I sent this.
                                              > >
                                              > > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                              > >
                                              > > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                              > > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                              > > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                              > > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                              > > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                              > > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                              > > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                              > >
                                              > > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                              > > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                              > > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                              > > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                              > >
                                              > > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                              > > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                              > > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                              > > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                              > > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                              > >
                                              > > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                              > > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                              > > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                              > > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                              > > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                              > > 1970, I believe.)
                                              > >
                                              > > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                              > > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                              > > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                              > >
                                              > > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                              > > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                              > > have been familiar with that term.
                                              > >
                                              > > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                              > > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                              > > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                              > >
                                              > > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                              > > association with a person might have evolved for
                                              > > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                              > > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                              > > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                              > > know who was the head of it.
                                              > >
                                              > > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                              > > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                              > > evolved to become associated with one single
                                              > > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                              > > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                              > >
                                              > > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                              > > well for history (IMO).
                                              > >
                                              > > Etznab
                                              > >
                                              > > -----Original Message-----
                                              > > From: tomleafeater tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                              > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                              > > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                              > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                              > Maybe.
                                              > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > Jonathan,
                                              > >
                                              > > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                              > principles
                                              > > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed
                                              > such
                                              > > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then
                                              > he
                                              > > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of
                                              > the
                                              > > Universe.
                                              > >
                                              > > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                              > referred to
                                              > > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                              > > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he
                                              > is
                                              > > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the
                                              > Living
                                              > > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not
                                              > the
                                              > > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                              > > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                              > > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality)
                                              > and on
                                              > > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                              > >
                                              > > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                              > dissonance
                                              > > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him,
                                              > the
                                              > > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                              > > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                              > > stage.
                                              > >
                                              > > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth
                                              > is,
                                              > > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                              > title, and
                                              > > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with
                                              > that
                                              > > title.
                                              > >
                                              > > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is
                                              > built
                                              > > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                              > either
                                              > > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you
                                              > out of
                                              > > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                              > > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                              > remove
                                              > > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                              > >
                                              > > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this,
                                              > but
                                              > > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                              > >
                                              > > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it
                                              > for
                                              > > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                              > > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the
                                              > chief
                                              > > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                              > tactics
                                              > > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                              > > facts bear this out.
                                              > >
                                              > > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                              > otherwise.
                                              > > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                              > because it
                                              > > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't
                                              > "concern
                                              > > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where
                                              > do
                                              > > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon
                                              > me if
                                              > > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                              > >
                                              > > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're
                                              > not
                                              > > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the
                                              > final
                                              > > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                              > relationship, and
                                              > > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                              > >
                                              > > Speaking for myself only,
                                              > >
                                              > > Leaf
                                              > >
                                              > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                              > > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Leaf,
                                              > > >
                                              > > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized
                                              > that
                                              > > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he
                                              > didn't
                                              > > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is
                                              > the
                                              > > impression that I got.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post
                                              > them
                                              > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I
                                              > don't
                                              > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                              > someone who
                                              > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may
                                              > have
                                              > > already posted this.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                              > > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                              > > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our
                                              > own
                                              > > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                              > unfoldment.
                                              > > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                              > > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                              > unfoldment,
                                              > > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all
                                              > the
                                              > > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like
                                              > they
                                              > > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look
                                              > at
                                              > > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                              > > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than
                                              > their
                                              > > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                              > should be
                                              > > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > Jonathan
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                              > > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Jonathan,
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you
                                              > have
                                              > > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                              > > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, "
                                              > I
                                              > > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive,
                                              > your
                                              > > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                              > impression
                                              > > about Twitchell?
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                              > Klemp,
                                              > > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                              > > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the
                                              > org,
                                              > > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full
                                              > size
                                              > > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum.
                                              > People
                                              > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand
                                              > in
                                              > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                              > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and
                                              > would
                                              > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                              > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                              > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or
                                              > was
                                              > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                              > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                              > > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                              > > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                              > responsible
                                              > > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same
                                              > time, He
                                              > > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                              > faiths are
                                              > > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at
                                              > the
                                              > > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind
                                              > as
                                              > > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human
                                              > race.
                                              > > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the
                                              > human
                                              > > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of
                                              > life
                                              > > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities
                                              > within
                                              > > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                              > > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                              > light-hearted
                                              > > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is
                                              > ever
                                              > > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest
                                              > His
                                              > > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                              > universes.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                              > world
                                              > > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                              > > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds
                                              > of
                                              > > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with,
                                              > but the
                                              > > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                              > > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the
                                              > ECK
                                              > > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                              > spiritual
                                              > > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                              > Mercy, He
                                              > > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which
                                              > is
                                              > > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in
                                              > every
                                              > > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                              > > life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                              > > through which the ECK flows. "
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                              > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > Harrison,
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are
                                              > in
                                              > > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other
                                              > words,
                                              > > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility
                                              > to
                                              > > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                              > because
                                              > > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                              > > already told you,
                                              > > > > > when you realize that you are your own master
                                              > you're not
                                              > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                              > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you
                                              > that
                                              > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                              > understand
                                              > > why you have major problems with it.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                              > > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any
                                              > ego.
                                              > > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                              > least.
                                              > > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                              > reported to
                                              > > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question."
                                              > The
                                              > > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask
                                              > your
                                              > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme
                                              > worship
                                              > > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy
                                              > to
                                              > > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried
                                              > to
                                              > > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become
                                              > more
                                              > > egotistical.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am
                                              > God
                                              > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                              > worshiping
                                              > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                              > realized" and
                                              > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the
                                              > test"
                                              > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > The people who realize that they are their own
                                              > master
                                              > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their
                                              > own
                                              > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have
                                              > "passed
                                              > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking
                                              > at
                                              > > things.
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > Jonathan
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                              > harrisonferrel
                                              > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a
                                              > person,
                                              > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your
                                              > reply
                                              > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                              > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                              > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions
                                              > and
                                              > > rationalization.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are
                                              > blue
                                              > > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                              > based on
                                              > > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that
                                              > the
                                              > > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not,
                                              > there
                                              > > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                              > workings
                                              > > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                              > "Sometimes a
                                              > > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything
                                              > close to
                                              > > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or
                                              > she is
                                              > > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It
                                              > has
                                              > > little meaning in the West.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of
                                              > images
                                              > > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                              > > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                              > canvas. If
                                              > > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                              > > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence
                                              > to
                                              > > back up your claims.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the
                                              > time I
                                              > > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                              > > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't
                                              > very
                                              > > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far
                                              > more out
                                              > > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                              > > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                              > overtones.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and
                                              > visions,
                                              > > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you
                                              > don't
                                              > > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                              > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on
                                              > a
                                              > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do.
                                              > It's
                                              > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess
                                              > that
                                              > > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                              > > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                              > > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                              > > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                              > folly.
                                              > > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery
                                              > or
                                              > > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                              > original
                                              > > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people
                                              > of
                                              > > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                              > truth.
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                              > > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > Harrison,
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were
                                              > real. And
                                              > > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                              > > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that
                                              > Ford
                                              > > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only
                                              > because
                                              > > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not
                                              > had the
                                              > > time to read his book.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > So getting back to your inner
                                              > experiences.
                                              > > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this
                                              > type
                                              > > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                              > mildly).
                                              > > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                              > > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the
                                              > time
                                              > > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                              > about one
                                              > > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are
                                              > your
                                              > > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1)
                                              > think
                                              > > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It
                                              > was
                                              > > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny
                                              > and (2)
                                              > > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                              > > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                              > discussion.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                              > > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                              > > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way.
                                              > The
                                              > > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                              > > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse
                                              > than
                                              > > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally
                                              > have no
                                              > > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going
                                              > on is
                                              > > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to
                                              > the
                                              > > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                              > didn't
                                              > > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on
                                              > the
                                              > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story
                                              > about
                                              > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly
                                              > left
                                              > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put
                                              > it,
                                              > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                              > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you
                                              > there.
                                              > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                              > > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when
                                              > they
                                              > > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think
                                              > it is
                                              > > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it
                                              > is
                                              > > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                              > people
                                              > > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                              > specifically
                                              > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                              > > reasons.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the
                                              > books
                                              > > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                              > experiences
                                              > > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone
                                              > Of
                                              > > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck
                                              > book.
                                              > > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                              > another
                                              > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you
                                              > know
                                              > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > Jonathan
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                              > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                              > completely
                                              > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                              > contents of
                                              > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                              > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                              > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms
                                              > that
                                              > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                              > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major
                                              > events
                                              > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of
                                              > thing?
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person,
                                              > a
                                              > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of
                                              > deranged
                                              > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little
                                              > bell
                                              > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded
                                              > nutjob
                                              > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                              > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                              > un-believe-able.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show
                                              > you
                                              > > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                              > quick to
                                              > > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap.
                                              > When
                                              > > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do
                                              > with
                                              > > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares
                                              > them
                                              > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                              > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all
                                              > other
                                              > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of
                                              > much of
                                              > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                              > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with
                                              > any
                                              > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would
                                              > want
                                              > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                              > > satisfying answer.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell
                                              > or
                                              > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind.
                                              > It
                                              > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed,
                                              > years
                                              > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                              > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                              > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with
                                              > eckankar,
                                              > > I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation
                                              > for
                                              > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                              > eckankar, as
                                              > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions
                                              > for old
                                              > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in
                                              > the
                                              > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people
                                              > in
                                              > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                              > innumerable
                                              > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                              > > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                              > > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                              > > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging,
                                              > (and in
                                              > > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories,"
                                              > out
                                              > > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold
                                              > klemp
                                              > > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he
                                              > would
                                              > > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                              > distorted
                                              > > sense of self.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                              > > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult
                                              > with
                                              > > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                              > better
                                              > > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with
                                              > the
                                              > > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good
                                              > to
                                              > > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and
                                              > cheat
                                              > > at the helm.
                                              > > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > > >
                                              > > > > > >
                                              > > > > >
                                              > > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > >
                                              >
                                            • yoga_nidra
                                              I think Twitchell s use of the term was simply because mahanta has a kind of lyrical quality. Many sankrit words just sound beautiful. Which reminds me,
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Apr 16, 2010
                                                I think Twitchell's use of the term was simply because "mahanta" has a kind of lyrical quality. Many sankrit words just sound beautiful. Which reminds me, "Sugmad" is not sanskrit, more like a character from Star Trek.

                                                And of course Twitchell's M.O. was to refashion the more common religious terms into something exotic, different, and better than the competition. "Mshstma" was too evocative of Gandhi, too Indian. "Mahanta" on the other hand was pleasing word that could be assigned a new meaning, and it didn't evoke any Indian cultural baggage. It's all marketing, nothing mysterious going on here.

                                                --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, yoga_nidra <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee <thomaslee40@> wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order to create new terms for his new religion.
                                                > > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma. The word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to describe a highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.
                                                >
                                                > Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word that means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism, though Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is something he himself came up with.
                                                >
                                                > Mahanta can also be a name.
                                                >
                                                > http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html
                                                >
                                                > Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters, a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.
                                                >
                                                > http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > > ________________________________
                                                > > From: "etznab@" <etznab@>
                                                > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                > > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                                > > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                                > > the first time I sent this.
                                                > >
                                                > > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                                > >
                                                > > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                                > > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                                > > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                                > > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                                > > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                                > > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                                > > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                                > >
                                                > > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                                > > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                                > > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                                > > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                                > >
                                                > > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                                > > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                                > > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                                > > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                                > > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                                > >
                                                > > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                                > > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                                > > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                                > > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                                > > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                                > > 1970, I believe.)
                                                > >
                                                > > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                                > > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                                > > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                                > >
                                                > > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                                > > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                                > > have been familiar with that term.
                                                > >
                                                > > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                                > > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                                > > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                                > >
                                                > > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                                > > association with a person might have evolved for
                                                > > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                                > > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                                > > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                                > > know who was the head of it.
                                                > >
                                                > > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                                > > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                                > > evolved to become associated with one single
                                                > > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                                > > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                                > >
                                                > > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                                > > well for history (IMO).
                                                > >
                                                > > Etznab
                                                > >
                                                > > -----Original Message-----
                                                > > From: tomleafeater <tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                                > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                > > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                                > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                                > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > > Jonathan,
                                                > >
                                                > > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain principles
                                                > > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he claimed such
                                                > > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But then he
                                                > > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master of the
                                                > > Universe.
                                                > >
                                                > > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he referred to
                                                > > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned, that
                                                > > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person, he is
                                                > > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta, the Living
                                                > > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is not the
                                                > > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to the
                                                > > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as LIVING,
                                                > > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating personality) and on
                                                > > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                                > >
                                                > > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive dissonance
                                                > > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of him, the
                                                > > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he was
                                                > > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he went on
                                                > > stage.
                                                > >
                                                > > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the truth is,
                                                > > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that title, and
                                                > > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings with that
                                                > > title.
                                                > >
                                                > > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because Eckankar is built
                                                > > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can either
                                                > > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick you out of
                                                > > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization. That
                                                > > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can remove
                                                > > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                                > >
                                                > > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny this, but
                                                > > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                                > >
                                                > > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will answer it for
                                                > > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off other
                                                > > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be the chief
                                                > > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative tactics
                                                > > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his followers. The
                                                > > facts bear this out.
                                                > >
                                                > > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim otherwise.
                                                > > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this, because it
                                                > > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you don't "concern
                                                > > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just where do
                                                > > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not? Pardon me if
                                                > > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                                > >
                                                > > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what you're not
                                                > > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make the final
                                                > > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the relationship, and
                                                > > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                                > >
                                                > > Speaking for myself only,
                                                > >
                                                > > Leaf
                                                > >
                                                > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                                > > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Leaf,
                                                > > >
                                                > > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He emphasized that
                                                > > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that he didn't
                                                > > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that is the
                                                > > impression that I got.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please post them
                                                > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message board. I don't
                                                > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from someone who
                                                > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that you may have
                                                > > already posted this.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member of
                                                > > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't even
                                                > > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us is our own
                                                > > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual unfoldment.
                                                > > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND starts
                                                > > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal unfoldment,
                                                > > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and all the
                                                > > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act like they
                                                > > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should look at
                                                > > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the end, I
                                                > > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved than their
                                                > > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I should be
                                                > > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other people's.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Jonathan
                                                > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                                > > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Jonathan,
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion you have
                                                > > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and that you
                                                > > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more egotistical, " I
                                                > > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was alive, your
                                                > > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that impression
                                                > > about Twitchell?
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as Klemp,
                                                > > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell. While in
                                                > > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run the org,
                                                > > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji full size
                                                > > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad nauseum. People
                                                > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would stand in
                                                > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan" and to
                                                > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity, and would
                                                > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you feel the
                                                > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                                > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a Master, or was
                                                > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by inner
                                                > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up all
                                                > > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                                > > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is responsible
                                                > > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the same time, He
                                                > > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various faiths are
                                                > > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and looks at the
                                                > > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of mankind as
                                                > > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the human race.
                                                > > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to the human
                                                > > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual affairs of life
                                                > > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and entities within
                                                > > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the higher
                                                > > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is light-hearted
                                                > > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions, He is ever
                                                > > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those nearest His
                                                > > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and universes.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the world
                                                > > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all psychic
                                                > > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the Worlds of
                                                > > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk with, but the
                                                > > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is the
                                                > > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He is the ECK
                                                > > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the spiritual
                                                > > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and Mercy, He
                                                > > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and which is
                                                > > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta in every
                                                > > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other forms of
                                                > > life. His physical body is the only representation of the channel
                                                > > through which the ECK flows. "
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                                > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Harrison,
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that YOU are in
                                                > > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In other words,
                                                > > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own responsibility to
                                                > > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you because
                                                > > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my reply I
                                                > > already told you,
                                                > > > > > when you realize that you are your own master you're not
                                                > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better than
                                                > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with you that
                                                > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I understand
                                                > > why you have major problems with it.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading my
                                                > > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had any ego.
                                                > > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the least.
                                                > > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was reported to
                                                > > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a question." The
                                                > > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and ask your
                                                > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most extreme worship
                                                > > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is easy to
                                                > > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually tried to
                                                > > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                                > > egotistical.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I am God
                                                > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start worshiping
                                                > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God realized" and
                                                > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed the test"
                                                > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > The people who realize that they are their own master
                                                > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on their own
                                                > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who have "passed
                                                > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of looking at
                                                > > things.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Jonathan
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, harrisonferrel
                                                > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as a person,
                                                > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but your reply
                                                > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge or
                                                > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the same
                                                > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar � assumptions and
                                                > > rationalization.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we are blue
                                                > > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses based on
                                                > > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion that the
                                                > > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than not, there
                                                > > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the workings
                                                > > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase, "Sometimes a
                                                > > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything close to
                                                > > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he or she is
                                                > > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect. It has
                                                > > little meaning in the West.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora of images
                                                > > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world. By
                                                > > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a canvas. If
                                                > > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that holds a
                                                > > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any evidence to
                                                > > back up your claims.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at the time I
                                                > > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the hope of
                                                > > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book isn't very
                                                > > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got far more out
                                                > > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with this
                                                > > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar overtones.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and visions,
                                                > > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and you don't
                                                > > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is like a
                                                > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis based on a
                                                > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong to do. It's
                                                > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to guess that
                                                > > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the perpetuation of
                                                > > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                                > > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations for
                                                > > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer folly.
                                                > > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own imagery or
                                                > > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my original
                                                > > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving people of
                                                > > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of truth.
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                > > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > Harrison,
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were real. And
                                                > > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost certainly
                                                > > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something that Ford
                                                > > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford only because
                                                > > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have not had the
                                                > > time to read his book.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > So getting back to your inner experiences.
                                                > > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that this type
                                                > > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it mildly).
                                                > > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just for you
                                                > > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to the time
                                                > > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you about one
                                                > > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that "You are your
                                                > > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and (1) think
                                                > > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own religion. It was
                                                > > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own destiny and (2)
                                                > > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer talking
                                                > > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general discussion.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book was
                                                > > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported Twitchell's
                                                > > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the way. The
                                                > > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                                > > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And worse than
                                                > > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they generally have no
                                                > > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is going on is
                                                > > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that to the
                                                > > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that didn't
                                                > > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > I still remember something that I read on the
                                                > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a story about
                                                > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and promptly left
                                                > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the emphatically put it,
                                                > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how the
                                                > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for you there.
                                                > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > So lots of people have inner experiences
                                                > > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And when they
                                                > > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I think it is
                                                > > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar, but it is
                                                > > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or people
                                                > > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not specifically
                                                > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about possible
                                                > > reasons.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all the books
                                                > > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner experiences
                                                > > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta Stone Of
                                                > > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard Eck book.
                                                > > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be another
                                                > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before you know
                                                > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > Jonathan
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was completely
                                                > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the contents of
                                                > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human beings,
                                                > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                                > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain terms that
                                                > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was on a
                                                > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the major events
                                                > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > So what do you do with this kind of thing?
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded person, a
                                                > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order of deranged
                                                > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a little bell
                                                > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the deluded nutjob
                                                > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose fantastic
                                                > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are un-believe-able.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > When you have experiences that show you
                                                > > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are quick to
                                                > > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such crap. When
                                                > > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to do with
                                                > > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It scares them
                                                > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's scary and
                                                > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and all other
                                                > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy of much of
                                                > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is just
                                                > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do with any
                                                > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind would want
                                                > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon a
                                                > > satisfying answer.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp, twitchell or
                                                > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart mind. It
                                                > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was amazed, years
                                                > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I found a
                                                > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar subject
                                                > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I thought.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with eckankar,
                                                > > I left and looked into just about every other possible explanation for
                                                > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that eckankar, as
                                                > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing definitions for old
                                                > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced in the
                                                > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good people in
                                                > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown innumerable
                                                > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human mind,
                                                > > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and the
                                                > > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is a
                                                > > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an encouraging, (and in
                                                > > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life "memories," out
                                                > > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if harold klemp
                                                > > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had he would
                                                > > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already distorted
                                                > > sense of self.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to say the
                                                > > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the cult with
                                                > > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become better
                                                > > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree with the
                                                > > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some good to
                                                > > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar and cheat
                                                > > at the helm.
                                                > > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > >
                                                >
                                              • etznab@aol.com
                                                OK. But that website had a quote by me. And it said then, as I said the other day, I don t be- lieve mahanta is in Johnson s book. I said the word in
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Apr 17, 2010
                                                  OK. But that website had a quote by me. And
                                                  it said then, as I said the other day, I don't be-
                                                  lieve "mahanta" is in Johnson's book. I said the
                                                  word in Johnson's book was "mahatma".

                                                  Example:

                                                  Why does this interest me? Because I also
                                                  recall finding the word devotee and/or devotion
                                                  used to describe the word "mahatma". This is
                                                  the word that appears in Julian Johnson's book.
                                                  I don't believe the word "mahanta" is there - in
                                                  Path of the Masters.

                                                  http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157

                                                  Etznab

                                                  -----Original Message-----
                                                  From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                                  To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                  Sent: Sat, Apr 17, 2010 1:25 am
                                                  Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                                  Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                                   


                                                  --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                                  > Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                                  > is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                  > a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."
                                                  >
                                                  > A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                                  > not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                                  > that book - The Path of the Masters.

                                                  I don't know for sure either, I was taking the word of the website I
                                                  cited.

                                                  Here is something David Lane wrote:

                                                  "When Twitchell first started writing about Eckankar he more or less
                                                  used terminology which was based upon shabd yoga. However, he quickly
                                                  began to take on terms which were not in Radhasoami literature and
                                                  incorporate them into the larger theology of Eckankar, as witnessed in
                                                  The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad. In so doing he made Eckankar an eclectic
                                                  teaching, even though its major emphasis was Indian in origin. The term
                                                  Mahanta is a case in point. Although the term usually translates as
                                                  "one who is in charge of a temple" or "head of an ashram," Twitchell
                                                  utilized it as meaning: "The Living Eck Master.""

                                                  http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html

                                                  >
                                                  > (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                                  > in POTM, please cite page number.)
                                                  >
                                                  > Here is something else to consider about the
                                                  > knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                                  > its formative stages.
                                                  >
                                                  > A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:
                                                  >
                                                  > "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                                  > on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                                  > them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                                  > to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                                  > basically much of the material is good because
                                                  > it is copied. [....]"
                                                  >
                                                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankarhistory/message/1434
                                                  >
                                                  > What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                                  > president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                                  > familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                                  > when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                                  > was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                                  > years!
                                                  >
                                                  > "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                                  > that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                                  > joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                                  > as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                                  > rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue
                                                  >
                                                  > [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/9a1844ccb34936ef?hl=en#
                                                  >
                                                  > BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                                  > publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                                  > or 1969.
                                                  >
                                                  > In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                                  > in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                                  > Notes.
                                                  >
                                                  > For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                                  > became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                                  > was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".
                                                  >
                                                  > The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                                  > appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                                  > tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                                  > marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                                  > later 60s.
                                                  >
                                                  > Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                                  > Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                                  > on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                                  > mahatmas into four classes:"
                                                  >
                                                  > The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                                  > sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.
                                                  >
                                                  > Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                                  > used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                                  > synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                                  > word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                                  > to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                                  > it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                                  > also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                                  > word, in my opinion.
                                                  >
                                                  > The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                                  > has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                                  > Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                                  > it looks like each group became partial to one
                                                  > term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                                  > generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                                  > used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                                  > research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                                  > for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                                  > sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.
                                                  >
                                                  > Etznab
                                                  >
                                                  > -----Original Message-----
                                                  > From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                                  > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                  > Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                                  > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                                  Maybe.
                                                  > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                  >
                                                  >  
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee
                                                  > thomaslee40@ wrote:
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order
                                                  to
                                                  > create new terms for his new religion.
                                                  > > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma.
                                                  The
                                                  > word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to
                                                  describe a
                                                  > highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                                  > individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.
                                                  >
                                                  > Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word
                                                  that
                                                  > means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism,
                                                  though
                                                  > Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                                  > something he himself came up with.
                                                  >
                                                  > Mahanta can also be a name.
                                                  >
                                                  > http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mahanta.html
                                                  >
                                                  > Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian
                                                  > Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                  a
                                                  > book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.
                                                  >
                                                  > http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=9297157
                                                  >
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > > ________________________________
                                                  > > From: "etznab@" etznab@
                                                  > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                  > > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                                  > > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                  > Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                                  > > the first time I sent this.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                                  > > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                                  > > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                                  > > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                                  > > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                                  > > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                                  > > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                                  > > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                                  > > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                                  > > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                                  > > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                                  > > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                                  > > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                                  > > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                                  > >
                                                  > > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                                  > > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                                  > > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                                  > > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                                  > > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                                  > > 1970, I believe.)
                                                  > >
                                                  > > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                                  > > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                                  > > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                                  > > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                                  > > have been familiar with that term.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                                  > > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                                  > > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                                  > >
                                                  > > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                                  > > association with a person might have evolved for
                                                  > > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                                  > > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                                  > > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                                  > > know who was the head of it.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                                  > > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                                  > > evolved to become associated with one single
                                                  > > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                                  > > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                                  > >
                                                  > > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                                  > > well for history (IMO).
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Etznab
                                                  > >
                                                  > > -----Original Message-----
                                                  > > From: tomleafeater tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                                  > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                  > > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                                  > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                  Greater.
                                                  > Maybe.
                                                  > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                  > >
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Jonathan,
                                                  > >
                                                  > > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                                  > principles
                                                  > > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he
                                                  claimed
                                                  > such
                                                  > > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But
                                                  then
                                                  > he
                                                  > > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master
                                                  of
                                                  > the
                                                  > > Universe.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                                  > referred to
                                                  > > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned,
                                                  that
                                                  > > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person,
                                                  he
                                                  > is
                                                  > > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta,
                                                  the
                                                  > Living
                                                  > > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is
                                                  not
                                                  > the
                                                  > > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to
                                                  the
                                                  > > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as
                                                  LIVING,
                                                  > > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating
                                                  personality)
                                                  > and on
                                                  > > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                                  > dissonance
                                                  > > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of
                                                  him,
                                                  > the
                                                  > > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he
                                                  was
                                                  > > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he
                                                  went on
                                                  > > stage.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the
                                                  truth
                                                  > is,
                                                  > > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                                  > title, and
                                                  > > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings
                                                  with
                                                  > that
                                                  > > title.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because
                                                  Eckankar is
                                                  > built
                                                  > > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                                  > either
                                                  > > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick
                                                  you
                                                  > out of
                                                  > > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization.
                                                  That
                                                  > > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                                  > remove
                                                  > > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                                  > >
                                                  > > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny
                                                  this,
                                                  > but
                                                  > > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will
                                                  answer it
                                                  > for
                                                  > > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off
                                                  other
                                                  > > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be
                                                  the
                                                  > chief
                                                  > > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                                  > tactics
                                                  > > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his
                                                  followers. The
                                                  > > facts bear this out.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                                  > otherwise.
                                                  > > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                                  > because it
                                                  > > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you
                                                  don't
                                                  > "concern
                                                  > > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just
                                                  where
                                                  > do
                                                  > > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not?
                                                  Pardon
                                                  > me if
                                                  > > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what
                                                  you're
                                                  > not
                                                  > > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make
                                                  the
                                                  > final
                                                  > > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                                  > relationship, and
                                                  > > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Speaking for myself only,
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Leaf
                                                  > >
                                                  > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                                  > > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Leaf,
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He
                                                  emphasized
                                                  > that
                                                  > > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that
                                                  he
                                                  > didn't
                                                  > > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that
                                                  is
                                                  > the
                                                  > > impression that I got.
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please
                                                  post
                                                  > them
                                                  > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message
                                                  board. I
                                                  > don't
                                                  > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                                  > someone who
                                                  > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that
                                                  you may
                                                  > have
                                                  > > already posted this.
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member
                                                  of
                                                  > > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't
                                                  even
                                                  > > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us
                                                  is our
                                                  > own
                                                  > > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                                  > unfoldment.
                                                  > > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND
                                                  starts
                                                  > > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                                  > unfoldment,
                                                  > > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and
                                                  all
                                                  > the
                                                  > > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act
                                                  like
                                                  > they
                                                  > > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should
                                                  look
                                                  > at
                                                  > > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the
                                                  end, I
                                                  > > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved
                                                  than
                                                  > their
                                                  > > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                                  > should be
                                                  > > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other
                                                  people's.
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Jonathan
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                                  > > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Jonathan,
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion
                                                  you
                                                  > have
                                                  > > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and
                                                  that you
                                                  > > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                                  egotistical, "
                                                  > I
                                                  > > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was
                                                  alive,
                                                  > your
                                                  > > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                                  > impression
                                                  > > about Twitchell?
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                                  > Klemp,
                                                  > > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell.
                                                  While in
                                                  > > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run
                                                  the
                                                  > org,
                                                  > > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji
                                                  full
                                                  > size
                                                  > > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad
                                                  nauseum.
                                                  > People
                                                  > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would
                                                  stand
                                                  > in
                                                  > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan"
                                                  and to
                                                  > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity,
                                                  and
                                                  > would
                                                  > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you
                                                  feel the
                                                  > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                                  > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a
                                                  Master, or
                                                  > was
                                                  > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by
                                                  inner
                                                  > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up
                                                  all
                                                  > > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                                  > > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                                  > responsible
                                                  > > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the
                                                  same
                                                  > time, He
                                                  > > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                                  > faiths are
                                                  > > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and
                                                  looks at
                                                  > the
                                                  > > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of
                                                  mankind
                                                  > as
                                                  > > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the
                                                  human
                                                  > race.
                                                  > > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to
                                                  the
                                                  > human
                                                  > > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual
                                                  affairs of
                                                  > life
                                                  > > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and
                                                  entities
                                                  > within
                                                  > > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the
                                                  higher
                                                  > > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                                  > light-hearted
                                                  > > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions,
                                                  He is
                                                  > ever
                                                  > > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those
                                                  nearest
                                                  > His
                                                  > > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                                  > universes.
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                                  > world
                                                  > > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all
                                                  psychic
                                                  > > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the
                                                  Worlds
                                                  > of
                                                  > > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk
                                                  with,
                                                  > but the
                                                  > > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is
                                                  the
                                                  > > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He
                                                  is the
                                                  > ECK
                                                  > > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                                  > spiritual
                                                  > > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                                  > Mercy, He
                                                  > > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and
                                                  which
                                                  > is
                                                  > > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta
                                                  in
                                                  > every
                                                  > > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other
                                                  forms of
                                                  > > life. His physical body is the only representation of the
                                                  channel
                                                  > > through which the ECK flows. "
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                  jonathanjohns96
                                                  > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Harrison,
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that
                                                  YOU are
                                                  > in
                                                  > > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In
                                                  other
                                                  > words,
                                                  > > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own
                                                  responsibility
                                                  > to
                                                  > > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                                  > because
                                                  > > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my
                                                  reply I
                                                  > > already told you,
                                                  > > > > > when you realize that you are your own master
                                                  > you're not
                                                  > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better
                                                  than
                                                  > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with
                                                  you
                                                  > that
                                                  > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                                  > understand
                                                  > > why you have major problems with it.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading
                                                  my
                                                  > > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had
                                                  any
                                                  > ego.
                                                  > > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                                  > least.
                                                  > > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                                  > reported to
                                                  > > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a
                                                  question."
                                                  > The
                                                  > > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and
                                                  ask
                                                  > your
                                                  > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most
                                                  extreme
                                                  > worship
                                                  > > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is
                                                  easy
                                                  > to
                                                  > > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually
                                                  tried
                                                  > to
                                                  > > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has
                                                  become
                                                  > more
                                                  > > egotistical.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I
                                                  am
                                                  > God
                                                  > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                                  > worshiping
                                                  > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                                  > realized" and
                                                  > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed
                                                  the
                                                  > test"
                                                  > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > The people who realize that they are their own
                                                  > master
                                                  > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on
                                                  their
                                                  > own
                                                  > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who
                                                  have
                                                  > "passed
                                                  > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of
                                                  looking
                                                  > at
                                                  > > things.
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Jonathan
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                  > harrisonferrel
                                                  > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as
                                                  a
                                                  > person,
                                                  > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but
                                                  your
                                                  > reply
                                                  > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge
                                                  or
                                                  > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the
                                                  same
                                                  > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar �
                                                  assumptions
                                                  > and
                                                  > > rationalization.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we
                                                  are
                                                  > blue
                                                  > > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                                  > based on
                                                  > > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion
                                                  that
                                                  > the
                                                  > > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than
                                                  not,
                                                  > there
                                                  > > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                                  > workings
                                                  > > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                                  > "Sometimes a
                                                  > > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything
                                                  > close to
                                                  > > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he
                                                  or
                                                  > she is
                                                  > > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect.
                                                  It
                                                  > has
                                                  > > little meaning in the West.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora
                                                  of
                                                  > images
                                                  > > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world.
                                                  By
                                                  > > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                                  > canvas. If
                                                  > > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that
                                                  holds a
                                                  > > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any
                                                  evidence
                                                  > to
                                                  > > back up your claims.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at
                                                  the
                                                  > time I
                                                  > > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the
                                                  hope of
                                                  > > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book
                                                  isn't
                                                  > very
                                                  > > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got
                                                  far
                                                  > more out
                                                  > > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with
                                                  this
                                                  > > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                                  > overtones.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and
                                                  > visions,
                                                  > > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and
                                                  you
                                                  > don't
                                                  > > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is
                                                  like a
                                                  > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis
                                                  based on
                                                  > a
                                                  > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong
                                                  to do.
                                                  > It's
                                                  > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to
                                                  guess
                                                  > that
                                                  > > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the
                                                  perpetuation of
                                                  > > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                                  > > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations
                                                  for
                                                  > > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                                  > folly.
                                                  > > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own
                                                  imagery
                                                  > or
                                                  > > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                                  > original
                                                  > > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving
                                                  people
                                                  > of
                                                  > > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                                  > truth.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                  > > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > Harrison,
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were
                                                  > real. And
                                                  > > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost
                                                  certainly
                                                  > > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something
                                                  that
                                                  > Ford
                                                  > > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford
                                                  only
                                                  > because
                                                  > > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have
                                                  not
                                                  > had the
                                                  > > time to read his book.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > So getting back to your inner
                                                  > experiences.
                                                  > > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that
                                                  this
                                                  > type
                                                  > > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                                  > mildly).
                                                  > > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just
                                                  for you
                                                  > > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to
                                                  the
                                                  > time
                                                  > > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                                  > about one
                                                  > > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that
                                                  "You are
                                                  > your
                                                  > > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and
                                                  (1)
                                                  > think
                                                  > > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own
                                                  religion. It
                                                  > was
                                                  > > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own
                                                  destiny
                                                  > and (2)
                                                  > > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer
                                                  talking
                                                  > > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                                  > discussion.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book
                                                  was
                                                  > > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported
                                                  Twitchell's
                                                  > > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the
                                                  way.
                                                  > The
                                                  > > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                                  > > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And
                                                  worse
                                                  > than
                                                  > > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they
                                                  generally
                                                  > have no
                                                  > > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is
                                                  going
                                                  > on is
                                                  > > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that
                                                  to
                                                  > the
                                                  > > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                                  > didn't
                                                  > > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > I still remember something that I
                                                  read on
                                                  > the
                                                  > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a
                                                  story
                                                  > about
                                                  > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and
                                                  promptly
                                                  > left
                                                  > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the
                                                  emphatically put
                                                  > it,
                                                  > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how
                                                  the
                                                  > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for
                                                  you
                                                  > there.
                                                  > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > So lots of people have inner
                                                  experiences
                                                  > > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And
                                                  when
                                                  > they
                                                  > > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I
                                                  think
                                                  > it is
                                                  > > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar,
                                                  but it
                                                  > is
                                                  > > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                                  > people
                                                  > > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                                  > specifically
                                                  > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about
                                                  possible
                                                  > > reasons.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all
                                                  the
                                                  > books
                                                  > > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                                  > experiences
                                                  > > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta
                                                  Stone
                                                  > Of
                                                  > > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard
                                                  Eck
                                                  > book.
                                                  > > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                                  > another
                                                  > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before
                                                  you
                                                  > know
                                                  > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > Jonathan
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups.
                                                  com,
                                                  > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                                  > completely
                                                  > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                                  > contents of
                                                  > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human
                                                  beings,
                                                  > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                                  > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain
                                                  terms
                                                  > that
                                                  > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was
                                                  on a
                                                  > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the
                                                  major
                                                  > events
                                                  > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > So what do you do with this
                                                  kind of
                                                  > thing?
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded
                                                  person,
                                                  > a
                                                  > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order
                                                  of
                                                  > deranged
                                                  > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a
                                                  little
                                                  > bell
                                                  > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the
                                                  deluded
                                                  > nutjob
                                                  > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose
                                                  fantastic
                                                  > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                                  > un-believe-able.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > When you have experiences that
                                                  show
                                                  > you
                                                  > > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                                  > quick to
                                                  > > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such
                                                  crap.
                                                  > When
                                                  > > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to
                                                  do
                                                  > with
                                                  > > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It
                                                  scares
                                                  > them
                                                  > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's
                                                  scary and
                                                  > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and
                                                  all
                                                  > other
                                                  > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy
                                                  of
                                                  > much of
                                                  > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is
                                                  just
                                                  > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do
                                                  with
                                                  > any
                                                  > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind
                                                  would
                                                  > want
                                                  > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon
                                                  a
                                                  > > satisfying answer.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp,
                                                  twitchell
                                                  > or
                                                  > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart
                                                  mind.
                                                  > It
                                                  > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was
                                                  amazed,
                                                  > years
                                                  > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I
                                                  found a
                                                  > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar
                                                  subject
                                                  > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I
                                                  thought.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with
                                                  > eckankar,
                                                  > > I left and looked into just about every other possible
                                                  explanation
                                                  > for
                                                  > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                                  > eckankar, as
                                                  > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing
                                                  definitions
                                                  > for old
                                                  > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced
                                                  in
                                                  > the
                                                  > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good
                                                  people
                                                  > in
                                                  > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                                  > innumerable
                                                  > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human
                                                  mind,
                                                  > > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and
                                                  the
                                                  > > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is
                                                  a
                                                  > > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an
                                                  encouraging,
                                                  > (and in
                                                  > > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life
                                                  "memories,"
                                                  > out
                                                  > > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if
                                                  harold
                                                  > klemp
                                                  > > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had
                                                  he
                                                  > would
                                                  > > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                                  > distorted
                                                  > > sense of self.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to
                                                  say the
                                                  > > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the
                                                  cult
                                                  > with
                                                  > > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                                  > better
                                                  > > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree
                                                  with
                                                  > the
                                                  > > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some
                                                  good
                                                  > to
                                                  > > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar
                                                  and
                                                  > cheat
                                                  > > at the helm.
                                                  > > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > >
                                                  >
                                                • thomas lee
                                                  The entire book The Path of the Masters can be read online for free at this site: http://www.archive.org/details/ThePathOfTheMasters I did a search in
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , Apr 18, 2010
                                                    The entire book  "The Path of the Masters" can be read online for free at this site:   http://www.archive.org/details/ThePathOfTheMasters

                                                    I did a search in this book using Google Books
                                                    > the word Mahanta does not appear in this book
                                                    > there are a few occurrences of the word Mahatma in this book 
                                                    http://books.google.com/books?lr=&cd=2&id=ZecSAAAAMAAJ&dq=path+of+masters+johnson&q=mahatma#search_anchor

                                                    I did a general search for Mahanta in all available books using Google Books
                                                    > the word Mahanta is a common last name in India
                                                    > I found this book in which the term Mahanta appears to be used as a spiritual
                                                    title for a person in India
                                                    http://books.google.com/books?id=pSMLz85WO1QC&pg=PA4&dq=mahanta&lr=&cd=45#v=onepage&q=mahanta&f=false    



                                                    From: "etznab@..." <etznab@...>
                                                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                    Sent: Sat, April 17, 2010 4:27:03 PM
                                                    Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                                     


                                                    OK. But that website had a quote by me. And
                                                    it said then, as I said the other day, I don't be-
                                                    lieve "mahanta" is in Johnson's book. I said the
                                                    word in Johnson's book was "mahatma".

                                                    Example:

                                                    Why does this interest me? Because I also
                                                    recall finding the word devotee and/or devotion
                                                    used to describe the word "mahatma". This is
                                                    the word that appears in Julian Johnson's book.
                                                    I don't believe the word "mahanta" is there - in
                                                    Path of the Masters.

                                                    http://www.jlaforum s.com/viewtopic. php?p=9297157

                                                    Etznab

                                                    -----Original Message-----
                                                    From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroup s.com>
                                                    To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                    Sent: Sat, Apr 17, 2010 1:25 am
                                                    Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                                    Excuse me if this post is a repeat

                                                     

                                                    --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, etznab@... wrote:
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                                    &gt; Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                                    &gt; is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                    &gt; a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                                    &gt; not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                                    &gt; that book - The Path of the Masters.

                                                    I don't know for sure either, I was taking the word of the website I
                                                    cited.

                                                    Here is something David Lane wrote:

                                                    "When Twitchell first started writing about Eckankar he more or less
                                                    used terminology which was based upon shabd yoga. However, he quickly
                                                    began to take on terms which were not in Radhasoami literature and
                                                    incorporate them into the larger theology of Eckankar, as witnessed in
                                                    The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad. In so doing he made Eckankar an eclectic
                                                    teaching, even though its major emphasis was Indian in origin. The term
                                                    Mahanta is a case in point. Although the term usually translates as
                                                    "one who is in charge of a temple" or "head of an ashram," Twitchell
                                                    utilized it as meaning: "The Living Eck Master.""

                                                    http://webspace. webring.com/ people/de/ eckcult/rsch3. html

                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                                    &gt; in POTM, please cite page number.)
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Here is something else to consider about the
                                                    &gt; knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                                    &gt; its formative stages.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                                    &gt; on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                                    &gt; them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                                    &gt; to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                                    &gt; basically much of the material is good because
                                                    &gt; it is copied. [....]"
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/eckankarhi story/message/ 1434
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                                    &gt; president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                                    &gt; familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                                    &gt; when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                                    &gt; was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                                    &gt; years!
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                                    &gt; that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                                    &gt; joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                                    &gt; as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                                    &gt; rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt;
                                                    http://groups. google.com/ group/alt. religion. eckankar/ browse_thread/ thread/9a1844ccb 34936ef?hl= en#
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                                    &gt; publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                                    &gt; or 1969.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                                    &gt; in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                                    &gt; Notes.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                                    &gt; became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                                    &gt; was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                                    &gt; appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                                    &gt; tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                                    &gt; marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                                    &gt; later 60s.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                                    &gt; Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                                    &gt; on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                                    &gt; mahatmas into four classes:"
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                                    &gt; sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                                    &gt; used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                                    &gt; synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                                    &gt; word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                                    &gt; to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                                    &gt; it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                                    &gt; also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                                    &gt; word, in my opinion.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                                    &gt; has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                                    &gt; Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                                    &gt; it looks like each group became partial to one
                                                    &gt; term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                                    &gt; generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                                    &gt; used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                                    &gt; research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                                    &gt; for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                                    &gt; sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Etznab
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; -----Original Message-----
                                                    &gt; From: yoga_nidra &lt;no_reply@yahoogroup s.com&gt;
                                                    &gt; To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                    &gt; Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                                    &gt; Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                                    Maybe.
                                                    &gt; Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt;  
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, thomas lee
                                                    &gt; thomaslee40@ wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order
                                                    to
                                                    &gt; create new terms for his new religion.
                                                    &gt; &gt; He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma.
                                                    The
                                                    &gt; word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to
                                                    describe a
                                                    &gt; highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                                    &gt; individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word
                                                    that
                                                    &gt; means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism,
                                                    though
                                                    &gt; Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                                    &gt; something he himself came up with.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Mahanta can also be a name.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; http://babynameswor ld.parentsconnec t.com/meaning_ of_Mahanta. html
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian
                                                    &gt; Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                    a
                                                    &gt; book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; http://www.jlaforum s.com/viewtopic. php?p=9297157
                                                    &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; ____________ _________ _________ __
                                                    &gt; &gt; From: "etznab@" etznab@
                                                    &gt; &gt; To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                    &gt; &gt; Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                                    &gt; &gt; Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                    &gt; Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                                    &gt; &gt; the first time I sent this.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                                    &gt; &gt; as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                                    &gt; &gt; myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                                    &gt; &gt; prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                                    &gt; &gt; of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                                    &gt; &gt; word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                                    &gt; &gt; by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                                    &gt; &gt; and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                                    &gt; &gt; published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                                    &gt; &gt; (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                                    &gt; &gt; "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                                    &gt; &gt; of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                                    &gt; &gt; sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                                    &gt; &gt; in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                                    &gt; &gt; the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                                    &gt; &gt; used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                                    &gt; &gt; and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                                    &gt; &gt; 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                                    &gt; &gt; 1970, I believe.)
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                                    &gt; &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                                    &gt; &gt; And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                                    &gt; &gt; tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                                    &gt; &gt; have been familiar with that term.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                                    &gt; &gt; to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                                    &gt; &gt; Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                                    &gt; &gt; association with a person might have evolved for
                                                    &gt; &gt; legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                                    &gt; &gt; usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                                    &gt; &gt; applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                                    &gt; &gt; know who was the head of it.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                                    &gt; &gt; consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                                    &gt; &gt; evolved to become associated with one single
                                                    &gt; &gt; person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                                    &gt; &gt; the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                                    &gt; &gt; well for history (IMO).
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Etznab
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; -----Original Message-----
                                                    &gt; &gt; From: tomleafeater tianyue@earthlink. net&gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                    &gt; &gt; Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                                    &gt; &gt; Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                    Greater.
                                                    &gt; Maybe.
                                                    &gt; &gt; Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Jonathan,
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                                    &gt; principles
                                                    &gt; &gt; or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he
                                                    claimed
                                                    &gt; such
                                                    &gt; &gt; things as "people should not worship the personality. " But
                                                    then
                                                    &gt; he
                                                    &gt; &gt; contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master
                                                    of
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; Universe.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                                    &gt; referred to
                                                    &gt; &gt; the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned,
                                                    that
                                                    &gt; &gt; indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person,
                                                    he
                                                    &gt; is
                                                    &gt; &gt; thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta,
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; Living
                                                    &gt; &gt; Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is
                                                    not
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; &gt; Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as
                                                    LIVING,
                                                    &gt; &gt; indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating
                                                    personality)
                                                    &gt; and on
                                                    &gt; &gt; the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                                    &gt; dissonance
                                                    &gt; &gt; in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of
                                                    him,
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he
                                                    was
                                                    &gt; &gt; introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he
                                                    went on
                                                    &gt; &gt; stage.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the
                                                    truth
                                                    &gt; is,
                                                    &gt; &gt; for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                                    &gt; title, and
                                                    &gt; &gt; is introduced with that title, and identified in writings
                                                    with
                                                    &gt; that
                                                    &gt; &gt; title.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because
                                                    Eckankar is
                                                    &gt; built
                                                    &gt; &gt; around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                                    &gt; either
                                                    &gt; &gt; give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; out of
                                                    &gt; &gt; eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization.
                                                    That
                                                    &gt; &gt; personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                                    &gt; remove
                                                    &gt; &gt; the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny
                                                    this,
                                                    &gt; but
                                                    &gt; &gt; the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will
                                                    answer it
                                                    &gt; for
                                                    &gt; &gt; you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off
                                                    other
                                                    &gt; &gt; author's writings to create his own path so that he could be
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; chief
                                                    &gt; &gt; personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                                    &gt; tactics
                                                    &gt; &gt; aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his
                                                    followers. The
                                                    &gt; &gt; facts bear this out.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                                    &gt; otherwise.
                                                    &gt; &gt; And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                                    &gt; because it
                                                    &gt; &gt; is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you
                                                    don't
                                                    &gt; "concern
                                                    &gt; &gt; yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just
                                                    where
                                                    &gt; do
                                                    &gt; &gt; you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not?
                                                    Pardon
                                                    &gt; me if
                                                    &gt; &gt; I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what
                                                    you're
                                                    &gt; not
                                                    &gt; &gt; ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; final
                                                    &gt; &gt; decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                                    &gt; relationship, and
                                                    &gt; &gt; realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Speaking for myself only,
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; Leaf
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                                    &gt; &gt; &lt;no_reply@ ...&gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; Leaf,
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He
                                                    emphasized
                                                    &gt; that
                                                    &gt; &gt; people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that
                                                    he
                                                    &gt; didn't
                                                    &gt; &gt; want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that
                                                    is
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; impression that I got.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; If you have other observations on Twitchell then please
                                                    post
                                                    &gt; them
                                                    &gt; &gt; because I see them as a welcome addition to this message
                                                    board. I
                                                    &gt; don't
                                                    &gt; &gt; know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                                    &gt; someone who
                                                    &gt; &gt; was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that
                                                    you may
                                                    &gt; have
                                                    &gt; &gt; already posted this.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member
                                                    of
                                                    &gt; &gt; Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't
                                                    even
                                                    &gt; &gt; concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us
                                                    is our
                                                    &gt; own
                                                    &gt; &gt; master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                                    &gt; unfoldment.
                                                    &gt; &gt; Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND
                                                    starts
                                                    &gt; &gt; acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                                    &gt; unfoldment,
                                                    &gt; &gt; that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and
                                                    all
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act
                                                    like
                                                    &gt; they
                                                    &gt; &gt; are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should
                                                    look
                                                    &gt; at
                                                    &gt; &gt; themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the
                                                    end, I
                                                    &gt; &gt; don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved
                                                    than
                                                    &gt; their
                                                    &gt; &gt; followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                                    &gt; should be
                                                    &gt; &gt; concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other
                                                    people's.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                                    &gt; &gt; &lt;tianyue@ &gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan,
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; In regards to worship of masters, and the notion
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; have
                                                    &gt; &gt; that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and
                                                    that you
                                                    &gt; &gt; think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                                    egotistical, "
                                                    &gt; I
                                                    &gt; &gt; just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was
                                                    alive,
                                                    &gt; your
                                                    &gt; &gt; assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                                    &gt; impression
                                                    &gt; &gt; about Twitchell?
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                                    &gt; Klemp,
                                                    &gt; &gt; and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell.
                                                    While in
                                                    &gt; &gt; today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; org,
                                                    &gt; &gt; PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji
                                                    full
                                                    &gt; size
                                                    &gt; &gt; wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad
                                                    nauseum.
                                                    &gt; People
                                                    &gt; &gt; practically fainted when he came into the room. They would
                                                    stand
                                                    &gt; in
                                                    &gt; &gt; line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan"
                                                    and to
                                                    &gt; &gt; shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity,
                                                    and
                                                    &gt; would
                                                    &gt; &gt; gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you
                                                    feel the
                                                    &gt; &gt; shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                                    &gt; &gt; omniscient, capable of anything.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a
                                                    Master, or
                                                    &gt; was
                                                    &gt; &gt; enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by
                                                    inner
                                                    &gt; &gt; masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up
                                                    all
                                                    &gt; &gt; doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                                    &gt; &gt; principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                                    &gt; responsible
                                                    &gt; &gt; for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the
                                                    same
                                                    &gt; time, He
                                                    &gt; &gt; must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                                    &gt; faiths are
                                                    &gt; &gt; also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and
                                                    looks at
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of
                                                    mankind
                                                    &gt; as
                                                    &gt; &gt; part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the
                                                    human
                                                    &gt; race.
                                                    &gt; &gt; Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; human
                                                    &gt; &gt; race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual
                                                    affairs of
                                                    &gt; life
                                                    &gt; &gt; on other planets and universes, that of the beings and
                                                    entities
                                                    &gt; within
                                                    &gt; &gt; the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the
                                                    higher
                                                    &gt; &gt; planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                                    &gt; light-hearted
                                                    &gt; &gt; at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions,
                                                    He is
                                                    &gt; ever
                                                    &gt; &gt; in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those
                                                    nearest
                                                    &gt; His
                                                    &gt; &gt; heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                                    &gt; universes.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                                    &gt; world
                                                    &gt; &gt; savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all
                                                    psychic
                                                    &gt; &gt; planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the
                                                    Worlds
                                                    &gt; of
                                                    &gt; &gt; God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk
                                                    with,
                                                    &gt; but the
                                                    &gt; &gt; spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; &gt; spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He
                                                    is the
                                                    &gt; ECK
                                                    &gt; &gt; Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                                    &gt; spiritual
                                                    &gt; &gt; essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                                    &gt; Mercy, He
                                                    &gt; &gt; is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and
                                                    which
                                                    &gt; is
                                                    &gt; &gt; the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta
                                                    in
                                                    &gt; every
                                                    &gt; &gt; man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other
                                                    forms of
                                                    &gt; &gt; life. His physical body is the only representation of the
                                                    channel
                                                    &gt; &gt; through which the ECK flows. "
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                    jonathanjohns96
                                                    &gt; &gt; &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; "You are your own master" simply means that
                                                    YOU are
                                                    &gt; in
                                                    &gt; &gt; charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In
                                                    other
                                                    &gt; words,
                                                    &gt; &gt; nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own
                                                    responsibility
                                                    &gt; to
                                                    &gt; &gt; someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                                    &gt; because
                                                    &gt; &gt; YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; You went off on the word "master" but in my
                                                    reply I
                                                    &gt; &gt; already told you,
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; when you realize that you are your own master
                                                    &gt; you're not
                                                    &gt; &gt; supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better
                                                    than
                                                    &gt; &gt; others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; that
                                                    &gt; &gt; a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                                    &gt; understand
                                                    &gt; &gt; why you have major problems with it.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I know you don't care, but for others reading
                                                    my
                                                    &gt; &gt; response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had
                                                    any
                                                    &gt; ego.
                                                    &gt; &gt; They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                                    &gt; least.
                                                    &gt; &gt; There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                                    &gt; reported to
                                                    &gt; &gt; have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a
                                                    question."
                                                    &gt; The
                                                    &gt; &gt; Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and
                                                    ask
                                                    &gt; your
                                                    &gt; &gt; question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Actually, it is the East where the most
                                                    extreme
                                                    &gt; worship
                                                    &gt; &gt; of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is
                                                    easy
                                                    &gt; to
                                                    &gt; &gt; see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually
                                                    tried
                                                    &gt; to
                                                    &gt; &gt; tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has
                                                    become
                                                    &gt; more
                                                    &gt; &gt; egotistical.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I
                                                    am
                                                    &gt; God
                                                    &gt; &gt; realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                                    &gt; worshiping
                                                    &gt; &gt; the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                                    &gt; realized" and
                                                    &gt; &gt; then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; test"
                                                    &gt; &gt; because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The people who realize that they are their own
                                                    &gt; master
                                                    &gt; &gt; (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on
                                                    their
                                                    &gt; own
                                                    &gt; &gt; without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who
                                                    have
                                                    &gt; "passed
                                                    &gt; &gt; the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of
                                                    looking
                                                    &gt; at
                                                    &gt; &gt; things.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                    &gt; harrisonferrel
                                                    &gt; &gt; &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as
                                                    a
                                                    &gt; person,
                                                    &gt; &gt; because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but
                                                    your
                                                    &gt; reply
                                                    &gt; &gt; sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge
                                                    or
                                                    &gt; &gt; ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the
                                                    same
                                                    &gt; &gt; nonsense that is already well known to eckankar �
                                                    assumptions
                                                    &gt; and
                                                    &gt; &gt; rationalization.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We can rationalize "experiences" until we
                                                    are
                                                    &gt; blue
                                                    &gt; &gt; in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                                    &gt; based on
                                                    &gt; &gt; no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion
                                                    that
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than
                                                    not,
                                                    &gt; there
                                                    &gt; &gt; is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                                    &gt; workings
                                                    &gt; &gt; of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                                    &gt; "Sometimes a
                                                    &gt; &gt; cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I am not a master of anything or anything
                                                    &gt; close to
                                                    &gt; &gt; a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he
                                                    or
                                                    &gt; she is
                                                    &gt; &gt; a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect.
                                                    It
                                                    &gt; has
                                                    &gt; &gt; little meaning in the West.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; My mind is capable of creating a plethora
                                                    of
                                                    &gt; images
                                                    &gt; &gt; and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world.
                                                    By
                                                    &gt; &gt; analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                                    &gt; canvas. If
                                                    &gt; &gt; you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that
                                                    holds a
                                                    &gt; &gt; message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any
                                                    evidence
                                                    &gt; to
                                                    &gt; &gt; back up your claims.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; time I
                                                    &gt; &gt; read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the
                                                    hope of
                                                    &gt; &gt; something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book
                                                    isn't
                                                    &gt; very
                                                    &gt; &gt; good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got
                                                    far
                                                    &gt; more out
                                                    &gt; &gt; of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with
                                                    this
                                                    &gt; &gt; forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                                    &gt; overtones.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From your analysis of my experiences and
                                                    &gt; visions,
                                                    &gt; &gt; you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; don't
                                                    &gt; &gt; know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is
                                                    like a
                                                    &gt; &gt; psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis
                                                    based on
                                                    &gt; a
                                                    &gt; &gt; single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong
                                                    to do.
                                                    &gt; It's
                                                    &gt; &gt; not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to
                                                    guess
                                                    &gt; that
                                                    &gt; &gt; he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the
                                                    perpetuation of
                                                    &gt; &gt; klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                                    &gt; &gt; candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The idea of coming up with explanations
                                                    for
                                                    &gt; &gt; experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                                    &gt; folly.
                                                    &gt; &gt; But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own
                                                    imagery
                                                    &gt; or
                                                    &gt; &gt; "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                                    &gt; original
                                                    &gt; &gt; post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar does a good job at relieving
                                                    people
                                                    &gt; of
                                                    &gt; &gt; their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                                    &gt; truth.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                    &gt; &gt; jonathanjohns96 &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Harrison,
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I believe you inner experiences were
                                                    &gt; real. And
                                                    &gt; &gt; I believe that they were just for you. They were almost
                                                    certainly
                                                    &gt; &gt; telling you that "You are a master too." That is something
                                                    that
                                                    &gt; Ford
                                                    &gt; &gt; Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford
                                                    only
                                                    &gt; because
                                                    &gt; &gt; a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have
                                                    not
                                                    &gt; had the
                                                    &gt; &gt; time to read his book.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So getting back to your inner
                                                    &gt; experiences.
                                                    &gt; &gt; They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that
                                                    this
                                                    &gt; type
                                                    &gt; &gt; of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                                    &gt; mildly).
                                                    &gt; &gt; So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just
                                                    for you
                                                    &gt; &gt; only) were telling you that were you were getting close to
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; time
                                                    &gt; &gt; when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                                    &gt; about one
                                                    &gt; &gt; thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that
                                                    "You are
                                                    &gt; your
                                                    &gt; &gt; own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and
                                                    (1)
                                                    &gt; think
                                                    &gt; &gt; that you are superior to others or (2) start your own
                                                    religion. It
                                                    &gt; was
                                                    &gt; &gt; just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own
                                                    destiny
                                                    &gt; and (2)
                                                    &gt; &gt; you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; From this point on I am no longer
                                                    talking
                                                    &gt; &gt; about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                                    &gt; discussion.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book
                                                    was
                                                    &gt; &gt; hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported
                                                    Twitchell's
                                                    &gt; &gt; experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the
                                                    way.
                                                    &gt; The
                                                    &gt; &gt; problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                                    &gt; &gt; experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And
                                                    worse
                                                    &gt; than
                                                    &gt; &gt; that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they
                                                    generally
                                                    &gt; have no
                                                    &gt; &gt; clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is
                                                    going
                                                    &gt; on is
                                                    &gt; &gt; the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that
                                                    to
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                                    &gt; didn't
                                                    &gt; &gt; match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I still remember something that I
                                                    read on
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a
                                                    story
                                                    &gt; about
                                                    &gt; &gt; how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and
                                                    promptly
                                                    &gt; left
                                                    &gt; &gt; his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the
                                                    emphatically put
                                                    &gt; it,
                                                    &gt; &gt; he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; &gt; exercises always state that the master will be waiting for
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; there.
                                                    &gt; &gt; Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So lots of people have inner
                                                    experiences
                                                    &gt; &gt; contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And
                                                    when
                                                    &gt; they
                                                    &gt; &gt; do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I
                                                    think
                                                    &gt; it is
                                                    &gt; &gt; actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar,
                                                    but it
                                                    &gt; is
                                                    &gt; &gt; rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                                    &gt; people
                                                    &gt; &gt; are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                                    &gt; specifically
                                                    &gt; &gt; talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about
                                                    possible
                                                    &gt; &gt; reasons.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I once told a fellow member that all
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; books
                                                    &gt; &gt; in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                                    &gt; experiences
                                                    &gt; &gt; made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta
                                                    Stone
                                                    &gt; Of
                                                    &gt; &gt; God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard
                                                    Eck
                                                    &gt; book.
                                                    &gt; &gt; I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                                    &gt; another
                                                    &gt; &gt; example of somebody having different experiences, and before
                                                    you
                                                    &gt; know
                                                    &gt; &gt; it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Jonathan
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups.
                                                    com,
                                                    &gt; &gt; harrisonferrel &lt;no_reply@ &gt; wrote:
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                                    &gt; completely
                                                    &gt; &gt; amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                                    &gt; contents of
                                                    &gt; &gt; my contemplations made me something superior to all human
                                                    beings,
                                                    &gt; &gt; including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                                    &gt; &gt; something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain
                                                    terms
                                                    &gt; that
                                                    &gt; &gt; the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was
                                                    on a
                                                    &gt; &gt; throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the
                                                    major
                                                    &gt; events
                                                    &gt; &gt; in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; So what do you do with this
                                                    kind of
                                                    &gt; thing?
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Luckily, I am not a deluded
                                                    person,
                                                    &gt; a
                                                    &gt; &gt; narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order
                                                    of
                                                    &gt; deranged
                                                    &gt; &gt; characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a
                                                    little
                                                    &gt; bell
                                                    &gt; &gt; that made me question everything about eckankar and the
                                                    deluded
                                                    &gt; nutjob
                                                    &gt; &gt; pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose
                                                    fantastic
                                                    &gt; &gt; rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                                    &gt; un-believe-able.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; When you have experiences that
                                                    show
                                                    &gt; you
                                                    &gt; &gt; to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                                    &gt; quick to
                                                    &gt; &gt; tell you it's because you need the light or some other such
                                                    crap.
                                                    &gt; When
                                                    &gt; &gt; you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to
                                                    do
                                                    &gt; with
                                                    &gt; &gt; you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It
                                                    scares
                                                    &gt; them
                                                    &gt; &gt; because they know they are making their shit up, so it's
                                                    scary and
                                                    &gt; &gt; threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I've come to see past lives and
                                                    all
                                                    &gt; other
                                                    &gt; &gt; dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy
                                                    of
                                                    &gt; much of
                                                    &gt; &gt; my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is
                                                    just
                                                    &gt; &gt; nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do
                                                    with
                                                    &gt; any
                                                    &gt; &gt; sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind
                                                    would
                                                    &gt; want
                                                    &gt; &gt; to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon
                                                    a
                                                    &gt; &gt; satisfying answer.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Why people believe klemp,
                                                    twitchell
                                                    &gt; or
                                                    &gt; &gt; morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart
                                                    mind.
                                                    &gt; It
                                                    &gt; &gt; has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was
                                                    amazed,
                                                    &gt; years
                                                    &gt; &gt; ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I
                                                    found a
                                                    &gt; &gt; couple of similar books that predated his of very similar
                                                    subject
                                                    &gt; &gt; matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I
                                                    thought.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Following my 12 year stint with
                                                    &gt; eckankar,
                                                    &gt; &gt; I left and looked into just about every other possible
                                                    explanation
                                                    &gt; for
                                                    &gt; &gt; what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                                    &gt; eckankar, as
                                                    &gt; &gt; a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing
                                                    definitions
                                                    &gt; for old
                                                    &gt; &gt; words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced
                                                    in
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; writings of David Lane and many others, including the good
                                                    people
                                                    &gt; in
                                                    &gt; &gt; this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                                    &gt; innumerable
                                                    &gt; &gt; plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Serious delving into the human
                                                    mind,
                                                    &gt; &gt; Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and
                                                    the
                                                    &gt; &gt; imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is
                                                    a
                                                    &gt; &gt; metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an
                                                    encouraging,
                                                    &gt; (and in
                                                    &gt; &gt; too many cases) believable, explanation for past life
                                                    "memories,"
                                                    &gt; out
                                                    &gt; &gt; of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I can only imagine that if
                                                    harold
                                                    &gt; klemp
                                                    &gt; &gt; had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had
                                                    he
                                                    &gt; would
                                                    &gt; &gt; take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                                    &gt; distorted
                                                    &gt; &gt; sense of self.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Eckankar is a disservice, to
                                                    say the
                                                    &gt; &gt; least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the
                                                    cult
                                                    &gt; with
                                                    &gt; &gt; an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                                    &gt; better
                                                    &gt; &gt; people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree
                                                    with
                                                    &gt; the
                                                    &gt; &gt; diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some
                                                    good
                                                    &gt; to
                                                    &gt; &gt; give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar
                                                    and
                                                    &gt; cheat
                                                    &gt; &gt; at the helm.
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt; &gt;
                                                    &gt;


                                                  • yoga_nidra
                                                    nice work just a guess, but maybe the person who thought mahanta is in TPOTM was thinking of eckankar, which is in Johnson s book.
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , Apr 18, 2010
                                                      nice work

                                                      just a guess, but maybe the person who thought "mahanta" is in TPOTM was thinking of "eckankar," which is in Johnson's book.



                                                      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, thomas lee <thomaslee40@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > The entire book "The Path of the Masters" can be read online for free at this site: http://www.archive.org/details/ThePathOfTheMasters
                                                      >
                                                      > I did a search in this book using Google Books
                                                      > > the word Mahanta does not appear in this book
                                                      > > there are a few occurrences of the word Mahatma in this book
                                                      > http://books.google.com/books?lr=&cd=2&id=ZecSAAAAMAAJ&dq=path+of+masters+johnson&q=mahatma#search_anchor
                                                      >
                                                      > I did a general search for Mahanta in all available books using Google Books
                                                      > > the word Mahanta is a common last name in India
                                                      > > I found this book in which the term Mahanta appears to be used as a spiritual
                                                      > title for a person in India
                                                      > http://books.google.com/books?id=pSMLz85WO1QC&pg=PA4&dq=mahanta&lr=&cd=45#v=onepage&q=mahanta&f=false
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > ________________________________
                                                      > From: "etznab@..." <etznab@...>
                                                      > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                                      > Sent: Sat, April 17, 2010 4:27:03 PM
                                                      > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > OK. But that website had a quote by me. And
                                                      > it said then, as I said the other day, I don't be-
                                                      > lieve "mahanta" is in Johnson's book. I said the
                                                      > word in Johnson's book was "mahatma".
                                                      >
                                                      > Example:
                                                      >
                                                      > Why does this interest me? Because I also
                                                      > recall finding the word devotee and/or devotion
                                                      > used to describe the word "mahatma". This is
                                                      > the word that appears in Julian Johnson's book.
                                                      > I don't believe the word "mahanta" is there - in
                                                      > Path of the Masters.
                                                      >
                                                      > http://www.jlaforum s.com/viewtopic. php?p=9297157
                                                      >
                                                      > Etznab
                                                      >
                                                      > -----Original Message-----
                                                      > From: yoga_nidra <no_reply@yahoogroup s.com>
                                                      > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                      > Sent: Sat, Apr 17, 2010 1:25 am
                                                      > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater. Maybe.
                                                      > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, etznab@ wrote:
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > > "Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta?
                                                      > > Most likely from Julian Johnson, as Mahanta
                                                      > > is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                      > > a book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with."
                                                      > >
                                                      > > A word in Julian Johnson's book is mahatma,
                                                      > > not mahanta. I don't know that mahanta is in
                                                      > > that book - The Path of the Masters.
                                                      >
                                                      > I don't know for sure either, I was taking the word of the website I
                                                      > cited.
                                                      >
                                                      > Here is something David Lane wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > "When Twitchell first started writing about Eckankar he more or less
                                                      > used terminology which was based upon shabd yoga. However, he quickly
                                                      > began to take on terms which were not in Radhasoami literature and
                                                      > incorporate them into the larger theology of Eckankar, as witnessed in
                                                      > The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad. In so doing he made Eckankar an eclectic
                                                      > teaching, even though its major emphasis was Indian in origin. The term
                                                      > Mahanta is a case in point. Although the term usually translates as
                                                      > "one who is in charge of a temple" or "head of an ashram," Twitchell
                                                      > utilized it as meaning: "The Living Eck Master.""
                                                      >
                                                      > http://webspace. webring.com/ people/de/ eckcult/rsch3. html
                                                      >
                                                      > >
                                                      > > (If someone happens to find mahanta listed
                                                      > > in POTM, please cite page number.)
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Here is something else to consider about the
                                                      > > knowledge of Sanskrit familiar to Eckankar in
                                                      > > its formative stages.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > A June 1980 letter by Louis Bluth has, in part:
                                                      > >
                                                      > > "[....] He [Paul Twitchell] borrowed my books
                                                      > > on Radha Soami and copied a large share from
                                                      > > them. I helped him write the Herb book and went
                                                      > > to Riverside University and took Sanskrit, so
                                                      > > basically much of the material is good because
                                                      > > it is copied. [....]"
                                                      > >
                                                      > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/eckankarhi story/message/ 1434
                                                      > >
                                                      > > What this tells me is that Dr. Louis Bluth - the
                                                      > > president of Eckankar in the early years - was
                                                      > > familiar with Sanskrit. I think it was about 1966
                                                      > > when Bluth met Paul Twitchell. I think L. Bluth
                                                      > > was a former Radha Soami student of about 17
                                                      > > years!
                                                      > >
                                                      > > "In a lecture by Bluth that I attended, Bluth stated
                                                      > > that he followed Radhasoami for 17 years before he
                                                      > > joined Eckankar. Bluth was an acupuncturist as well
                                                      > > as an MD (a bit of trivia for you, Etznab.) He was
                                                      > > rather full of himself, in my view. - Tianyue
                                                      > >
                                                      > > [Based on A.R.E. post 03/09/10]
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > http://groups. google.com/ group/alt. religion. eckankar/ browse_thread/ thread/9a1844ccb 34936ef?hl= en#
                                                      > >
                                                      > > BTW. The appearance of "mahanta" in Eckankar
                                                      > > publications apparently didn't surface until 1968,
                                                      > > or 1969.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > In 1969 the word appeared in The Flute of God and
                                                      > > in 1969 the large caps version appeared in Wisdom
                                                      > > Notes.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > For some reason this word was chosen and then
                                                      > > became popular around 1968 and 1969. And this
                                                      > > was joined to the words "Living Eck Master".
                                                      > >
                                                      > > The Eckankar definition for "Mahanta" does not
                                                      > > appear in The Path of the Masters far as I can
                                                      > > tell. The large caps form of MAHANTA was trade-
                                                      > > marked by Eckankar corporation probably in the
                                                      > > later 60s.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Chapter 3 of The Path of the Masters, by Julian
                                                      > > Johnson (called: The Masters and Their Duties),
                                                      > > on p. 178 has "The Masters themselves divide all
                                                      > > mahatmas into four classes:"
                                                      > >
                                                      > > The classes are written in italics and are called:
                                                      > > sikh, sadhu, sant, and param sant.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Over on p. 179: it appears (to me) that Johnson
                                                      > > used the words Satguru & param sant somewhat
                                                      > > synomymously. So he doesn't appear to use the
                                                      > > word Mahanta, but Mahatma. Eckankar decided
                                                      > > to use the word Mahanta (instead of Mahatma) -
                                                      > > it appears to me - in the title of it's leadership. It
                                                      > > also coined a somewhat unique meaning for the
                                                      > > word, in my opinion.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > The Eckankar Lexicon definition for Sat Guru
                                                      > > has near the end; See also Living ECK Master;
                                                      > > Mahanta. So regardless the word used, to me
                                                      > > it looks like each group became partial to one
                                                      > > term or another. Even when the meanings are
                                                      > > generically (for the most part) the same - and
                                                      > > used for a similar designation. I've seen in my
                                                      > > research synonymous definitions spelled out
                                                      > > for both mahatma and mahanta on some Web
                                                      > > sites. So I wonder how similar they really are.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Etznab
                                                      > >
                                                      > > -----Original Message-----
                                                      > > From: yoga_nidra no_reply@yahoogroup s.com>
                                                      > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                      > > Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:27 pm
                                                      > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something Greater.
                                                      > Maybe.
                                                      > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Â
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, thomas lee
                                                      > > thomaslee40@ wrote:
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Paul had been known to change the spelling of words in order
                                                      > to
                                                      > > create new terms for his new religion.
                                                      > > > He probably got the idea for Mahanta from the word Mahatma.
                                                      > The
                                                      > > word Mahatma means great soul. It was used by Theosophy to
                                                      > describe a
                                                      > > highly evolved person who would oversee the spiritual growth of
                                                      > > individuals. A Mahatma could also be considered to be a Master.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Twitchell didn't coin the term "mahanta," as it's a sanskrit word
                                                      > that
                                                      > > means "grand." Mahanta is used religious title in hinduism,
                                                      > though
                                                      > > Twitchell's use of the term as Grand Poobah of the Universe is
                                                      > > something he himself came up with.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Mahanta can also be a name.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > http://babynameswor ld.parentsconnec t.com/meaning_ of_Mahanta. html
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Where did Twitchell get the word Mahanta? Most likely from Julian
                                                      > > Johnson, as Mahanta is used in Johnson's The Path of the Masters,
                                                      > a
                                                      > > book Twitchell was undeniably familiar with.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > http://www.jlaforum s.com/viewtopic. php?p=9297157
                                                      > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > ____________ _________ _________ __
                                                      > > > From: "etznab@" etznab@
                                                      > > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                      > > > Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 1:00:19 PM
                                                      > > > Subject: Re: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                      > > Greater. Maybe. Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Sorry, Tian Yue. Think I forgot to hit "Reply All"
                                                      > > > the first time I sent this.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Searching evolution for the "Mahanta" term
                                                      > > > as used by Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I asked
                                                      > > > myself: "What books were published by Eckankar
                                                      > > > prior to its official founding in October 1965? And
                                                      > > > of those publications, which ones mentioned the
                                                      > > > word "mahanta"? (see Forward to The Tiger's Fang,
                                                      > > > by Brad Steiger. It mentions "mahantas".)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Two books come to mind. Introduction to Eckankar
                                                      > > > and The Flute of God. Information from these were
                                                      > > > published in Orion Magazine in 1964 and 1966
                                                      > > > (respectively) , I believe. (The Tiger's Fang was 1967)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Introduction to Eckankar doesn't appear to mention
                                                      > > > "Mahanta" in the Index section. However, The Flute
                                                      > > > of God mentions Mahanta once, and Mahanta con-
                                                      > > > sciousness twice. (I assume that the later appeared
                                                      > > > in the 1966 Orion series, but I'm not sure.)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > The Wisdom Notes book by Paul Twitchell shows
                                                      > > > the terms "ECK Master" and "living ECK Master",
                                                      > > > used in 1968. "MAHANTA" appears in January 1969
                                                      > > > and "MAHANTA - the living ECK Master" in February
                                                      > > > 1970. (Eckankar claimed non-profit status in July of
                                                      > > > 1970, I believe.)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > So I want to ask myself: "When exactly did the term
                                                      > > > "The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master" first appear?
                                                      > > > And when did it first become associated with a person?"
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Julian Johnson's book The Path of the Masters men-
                                                      > > > tions the term living Master, I believe. And Paul T. would
                                                      > > > have been familiar with that term.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > I don't find the term "mahanta" used by Eckankar prior
                                                      > > > to October 1965. Perhaps it first appeared in 1966 with
                                                      > > > Orion Magazine: The Flute of God installments?
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > If this time period is correct, it appears to me the
                                                      > > > association with a person might have evolved for
                                                      > > > legal reasons. I say this because religions were
                                                      > > > usually asked to give the name of their leader when
                                                      > > > applying for certain status. The State wanted to
                                                      > > > know who was the head of it.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Is this how something like a highest "state of
                                                      > > > consciousness" , or "Inner Master" ("Mahanta")
                                                      > > > evolved to become associated with one single
                                                      > > > person at a time? Because only one leader of
                                                      > > > the Eckankar organization exists at a time?
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > If that were the case, I am not saying it bodes
                                                      > > > well for history (IMO).
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Etznab
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > -----Original Message-----
                                                      > > > From: tomleafeater tianyue@earthlink. net>
                                                      > > > To: eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com
                                                      > > > Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 10:43 pm
                                                      > > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: I May Be God or Something
                                                      > Greater.
                                                      > > Maybe.
                                                      > > > Excuse me if this post is a repeat
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Jonathan,
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > One of Twitchell's tactics was to claim he stood for certain
                                                      > > principles
                                                      > > > or truisms, but then do exactly the opposite. Of course he
                                                      > claimed
                                                      > > such
                                                      > > > things as "people should not worship the personality. " But
                                                      > then
                                                      > > he
                                                      > > > contradicted that by declaring himself, a person, the Master
                                                      > of
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > Universe.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Notice in the quote I provided in my previous post that he
                                                      > > referred to
                                                      > > > the Mahanta with the pronoun, "He"? When gender is assigned,
                                                      > that
                                                      > > > indicates the so-called Mahanta is a person, and as a person,
                                                      > he
                                                      > > is
                                                      > > > thus a personality. In the same breath, he says the Mahanta,
                                                      > the
                                                      > > Living
                                                      > > > Eck Master (emphasizing "living," as in a living person) is
                                                      > not
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > body, but soul. Yet soul has no gender. So he's referring to
                                                      > the
                                                      > > > Mahanta as HE, indicating gender and personality, and as
                                                      > LIVING,
                                                      > > > indicating a physical embodiment (again indicating
                                                      > personality)
                                                      > > and on
                                                      > > > the other hand claiming the Mahanta is not the body, but soul.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > He's trying to have this both ways, which creates cognitive
                                                      > > dissonance
                                                      > > > in the follower. Clearly, he wanted his followers to think of
                                                      > him,
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > man, as the Mahanta, and to give further evidence of this, he
                                                      > was
                                                      > > > introduced as "the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master" when he
                                                      > went on
                                                      > > > stage.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Eckists like to claim the Mahanta is not the person, but the
                                                      > truth
                                                      > > is,
                                                      > > > for all practical purposes, it is a person who is given that
                                                      > > title, and
                                                      > > > is introduced with that title, and identified in writings
                                                      > with
                                                      > > that
                                                      > > > title.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Eckankar is all about worship of personality, because
                                                      > Eckankar is
                                                      > > built
                                                      > > > around the "Living Master" concept. And that personality can
                                                      > > either
                                                      > > > give you initiations and status, or take them away and kick
                                                      > you
                                                      > > out of
                                                      > > > eckankar. That personality controls the entire organization.
                                                      > That
                                                      > > > personality dictates what the doctrines will be, and even can
                                                      > > remove
                                                      > > > the initiations of the person who anointed him as master!
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > It doesn't get more personal than that. Eckists try to deny
                                                      > this,
                                                      > > but
                                                      > > > the evidence is blatantly clear.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Anyway, I notice you sidestepped my question. But I will
                                                      > answer it
                                                      > > for
                                                      > > > you: Paul Twitchell was a lying plagiarist who ripped off
                                                      > other
                                                      > > > author's writings to create his own path so that he could be
                                                      > the
                                                      > > chief
                                                      > > > personality in his own personality cult. He used manipulative
                                                      > > tactics
                                                      > > > aimed at controlling and creating dependency in his
                                                      > followers. The
                                                      > > > facts bear this out.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Paul Twitchell was no master. And it is not factual to claim
                                                      > > otherwise.
                                                      > > > And unlike you, I have no qualms at all about stating this,
                                                      > > because it
                                                      > > > is a cold, hard truth. In my view, your comment that you
                                                      > don't
                                                      > > "concern
                                                      > > > yourself with the question" is a rather evasive answer. Just
                                                      > where
                                                      > > do
                                                      > > > you stand? Are eckankar's alleged masters genuine, or not?
                                                      > Pardon
                                                      > > me if
                                                      > > > I say you seem a bit conflicted.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > But that's okay. In no way do I want to push you to do what
                                                      > you're
                                                      > > not
                                                      > > > ready to do. I understand that it can be difficult to make
                                                      > the
                                                      > > final
                                                      > > > decision to truly walk away from eckankar, severe the
                                                      > > relationship, and
                                                      > > > realize it to be what it is: A fraud.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Speaking for myself only,
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Leaf
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, jonathanjohns96
                                                      > > > <no_reply@ ...> wrote:
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > Leaf,
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > I listened to a cassette tape by Twitchell. He
                                                      > emphasized
                                                      > > that
                                                      > > > people should not worship the personality. He emphasized that
                                                      > he
                                                      > > didn't
                                                      > > > want to see Eckankar turned into a personality cult. So that
                                                      > is
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > impression that I got.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > If you have other observations on Twitchell then please
                                                      > post
                                                      > > them
                                                      > > > because I see them as a welcome addition to this message
                                                      > board. I
                                                      > > don't
                                                      > > > know whether I have ever seen comments about Twitchell from
                                                      > > someone who
                                                      > > > was in Eckankar when Twitchell was the LEM. I realize that
                                                      > you may
                                                      > > have
                                                      > > > already posted this.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > As far as Twitchell being a master. When I was a member
                                                      > of
                                                      > > > Eckankar I obviously thought that he was. Now, I really don't
                                                      > even
                                                      > > > concern myself with the question. I believe that each of us
                                                      > is our
                                                      > > own
                                                      > > > master, meaning we are responsible for our own spiritual
                                                      > > unfoldment.
                                                      > > > Nobody else is. When a person calls themselves a master AND
                                                      > starts
                                                      > > > acting like they can advise everyone else on their personal
                                                      > > unfoldment,
                                                      > > > that is when I have a problem with that person. Twitchell and
                                                      > all
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > other LEMs could have simply taught people stuff, but not act
                                                      > like
                                                      > > they
                                                      > > > are taking care of your spiritual life for you. People should
                                                      > look
                                                      > > at
                                                      > > > themselves as their own master and do it themselves. In the
                                                      > end, I
                                                      > > > don't think any of the LEMs are any more spiritually evolved
                                                      > than
                                                      > > their
                                                      > > > followers. It's all a moot point to even discuss it because I
                                                      > > should be
                                                      > > > concerned with my own spiritual unfoldment, not other
                                                      > people's.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > Jonathan
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com, "tomleafeater"
                                                      > > > <tianyue@ > wrote:
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > Jonathan,
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > In regards to worship of masters, and the notion
                                                      > you
                                                      > > have
                                                      > > > that Paul Twitchell "tried to tone down all of that," and
                                                      > that you
                                                      > > > think of "Klemp as the main one who has become more
                                                      > egotistical, "
                                                      > > I
                                                      > > > just have to say, as person who was in eckankar when PT was
                                                      > alive,
                                                      > > your
                                                      > > > assumption is absolutely incorrect. Where did you get that
                                                      > > impression
                                                      > > > about Twitchell?
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > Twitchell was worshiped as much if not even more as
                                                      > > Klemp,
                                                      > > > and the worship was deliberately engendered by Twitchell.
                                                      > While in
                                                      > > > today's eckankar, Klemp is withdrawing and letting others run
                                                      > the
                                                      > > org,
                                                      > > > PT was highly visible. There were Paulji T-Shirts, Paulji
                                                      > full
                                                      > > size
                                                      > > > wall posters, Paulji songs, Paulji photos, drawings, ad
                                                      > nauseum.
                                                      > > People
                                                      > > > practically fainted when he came into the room. They would
                                                      > stand
                                                      > > in
                                                      > > > line for long periods to get close to receive the "darshan"
                                                      > and to
                                                      > > > shake his hand to feel then spiritual "shock" of electricity,
                                                      > and
                                                      > > would
                                                      > > > gather in hallways afterwords to ask each other, "did you
                                                      > feel the
                                                      > > > shock?" Twitchell was literally thought to be all powerful and
                                                      > > > omniscient, capable of anything.
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > Question: Do you believe Paul Twitchell was a
                                                      > Master, or
                                                      > > was
                                                      > > > enlightened, or serving a spiritual purpose, or directed by
                                                      > inner
                                                      > > > masters? I'm very curious to know your honest answer to this.
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > But let's allow PT to speak for himself to clear up
                                                      > all
                                                      > > > doubt. Here's what PT had to say about himself:
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > "The Mahanta, the Living Eck Master, exceeds all the
                                                      > > > principles, beliefs, and faith in Adepts and Saviors. He is
                                                      > > responsible
                                                      > > > for all those who are the faithful within the ECK. At the
                                                      > same
                                                      > > time, He
                                                      > > > must overlook and see that those in the churches and various
                                                      > > faiths are
                                                      > > > also taken care of. He shoulders the worlds problems and
                                                      > looks at
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > major disasters, earthquakes, wars and other problems of
                                                      > mankind
                                                      > > as
                                                      > > > part of His duty to work out the karmic conditions of the
                                                      > human
                                                      > > race.
                                                      > > > Not only does He become the upholder and the inspiration to
                                                      > the
                                                      > > human
                                                      > > > race on earth, but He also takes care of the spiritual
                                                      > affairs of
                                                      > > life
                                                      > > > on other planets and universes, that of the beings and
                                                      > entities
                                                      > > within
                                                      > > > the psychic worlds, and those souls fortunate to reach the
                                                      > higher
                                                      > > > planes of god. His task is tremendous, and although He is
                                                      > > light-hearted
                                                      > > > at times and seemingly without thought of world conditions,
                                                      > He is
                                                      > > ever
                                                      > > > in the Atma Sarup (soul body) watching and guarding those
                                                      > nearest
                                                      > > His
                                                      > > > heart, and the populations of the various worlds, planes and
                                                      > > universes.
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > Therefore, we find that the Mahanta is not only the
                                                      > > world
                                                      > > > savior, but that of the world of worlds, all planets, all
                                                      > psychic
                                                      > > > planes, and the spiritual regions. He is the Savior of the
                                                      > Worlds
                                                      > > of
                                                      > > > God. This is not the physical man as you can see and talk
                                                      > with,
                                                      > > but the
                                                      > > > spiritual body which is the Atma Sarup (soul body), which is
                                                      > the
                                                      > > > spiritual body of all the Worlds of God. In other words, He
                                                      > is the
                                                      > > ECK
                                                      > > > Itself, and because the ECK is the basis of all life, the
                                                      > > spiritual
                                                      > > > essence which flows out of the SUGMAD, the Ocean of Love and
                                                      > > Mercy, He
                                                      > > > is IT. This is the spiritual body which is in all things and
                                                      > which
                                                      > > is
                                                      > > > the creative function of life. Therefore, we find the Mahanta
                                                      > in
                                                      > > every
                                                      > > > man, creature, plant and mineral, as well as in all other
                                                      > forms of
                                                      > > > life. His physical body is the only representation of the
                                                      > channel
                                                      > > > through which the ECK flows. "
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > Letters to a Chela, by Paul Twitchell
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                      > jonathanjohns96
                                                      > > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Harrison,
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > "You are your own master" simply means that
                                                      > YOU are
                                                      > > in
                                                      > > > charge of yourself, YOU are responsible for yourself. In
                                                      > other
                                                      > > words,
                                                      > > > nobody else is, and it is in error to give YOUR own
                                                      > responsibility
                                                      > > to
                                                      > > > someone else such as Klemp, thinking that they will help you
                                                      > > because
                                                      > > > YOU are the one to do it. That's all it means.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > You went off on the word "master" but in my
                                                      > reply I
                                                      > > > already told you,
                                                      > > > > > > when you realize that you are your own master
                                                      > > you're not
                                                      > > > supposed to be egotistical or use it to think you are better
                                                      > than
                                                      > > > others. Are you actually reading what I say? But I agree with
                                                      > you
                                                      > > that
                                                      > > > a lot of people have given the word "master" a bad name so I
                                                      > > understand
                                                      > > > why you have major problems with it.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > I know you don't care, but for others reading
                                                      > my
                                                      > > > response, none of the spiritual beings I had contact with had
                                                      > any
                                                      > > ego.
                                                      > > > They didn't require me to kowtow to them at all. None in the
                                                      > > least.
                                                      > > > There was a related story about Paul Twitchell where he was
                                                      > > reported to
                                                      > > > have said to one of the Eck masters "Master, I have a
                                                      > question."
                                                      > > The
                                                      > > > Eck master replied "I am not your master, but go ahead and
                                                      > ask
                                                      > > your
                                                      > > > question anyway." That's what I am talking about.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Actually, it is the East where the most
                                                      > extreme
                                                      > > worship
                                                      > > > of masters occurs. If you look at the devotees in India it is
                                                      > easy
                                                      > > to
                                                      > > > see how much they worship their masters. Twitchell actually
                                                      > tried
                                                      > > to
                                                      > > > tone down all of that. I see Klemp as the main one who has
                                                      > become
                                                      > > more
                                                      > > > egotistical.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > But no matter what, as soon as someone says "I
                                                      > am
                                                      > > God
                                                      > > > realized" it seems that a lot of people automatically start
                                                      > > worshiping
                                                      > > > the person. So my view is this, if someone says "I am God
                                                      > > realized" and
                                                      > > > then starts gathering followers, they have already "failed
                                                      > the
                                                      > > test"
                                                      > > > because they have let their ego get the best of them.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > The people who realize that they are their own
                                                      > > master
                                                      > > > (figuratively speaking) and pursue their enlightenment on
                                                      > their
                                                      > > own
                                                      > > > without gathering followers are the ones in my opinion who
                                                      > have
                                                      > > "passed
                                                      > > > the test" if you want to use that terminology and way of
                                                      > looking
                                                      > > at
                                                      > > > things.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Jonathan
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                      > > harrisonferrel
                                                      > > > <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > First, Jonathan, no reflection on you as
                                                      > a
                                                      > > person,
                                                      > > > because I don't know you. I imagine you are a nice guy, but
                                                      > your
                                                      > > reply
                                                      > > > sounds to me like more horseshit. It is based on no knowledge
                                                      > or
                                                      > > > ability to assess my situation. It's just perpetuating the
                                                      > same
                                                      > > > nonsense that is already well known to eckankar ÃÆ'¯Â¿Â½
                                                      > assumptions
                                                      > > and
                                                      > > > rationalization.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > We can rationalize "experiences" until we
                                                      > are
                                                      > > blue
                                                      > > > in the face. But this is only guessing. And these are guesses
                                                      > > based on
                                                      > > > no good reason at all. It's time we come to the conclusion
                                                      > that
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > mind gives us images for a personal reason. More often than
                                                      > not,
                                                      > > there
                                                      > > > is no reason to read into these images anything more than the
                                                      > > workings
                                                      > > > of the imagination. As Freud once said, and I paraphrase,
                                                      > > "Sometimes a
                                                      > > > cigar in your dream is just a cigar."
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > I am not a master of anything or anything
                                                      > > close to
                                                      > > > a master. In fact, I would challenge ANYBODY to prove that he
                                                      > or
                                                      > > she is
                                                      > > > a master. This word, master, is used without care or respect.
                                                      > It
                                                      > > has
                                                      > > > little meaning in the West.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > My mind is capable of creating a plethora
                                                      > of
                                                      > > images
                                                      > > > and scenarios that are of no significance to the real world.
                                                      > By
                                                      > > > analogy, I can take ten buckets of paint and throw them at a
                                                      > > canvas. If
                                                      > > > you want to say that the end result is meaningful art that
                                                      > holds a
                                                      > > > message, then you're dabbling in the absurd without any
                                                      > evidence
                                                      > > to
                                                      > > > back up your claims.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > I did read Johnson's book. That guy, at
                                                      > the
                                                      > > time I
                                                      > > > read it, was on his own ego trip, still holding on to the
                                                      > hope of
                                                      > > > something valuable from his eckankar experience. His book
                                                      > isn't
                                                      > > very
                                                      > > > good or helpful. David Lane's cuts to the truth. And I got
                                                      > far
                                                      > > more out
                                                      > > > of Sharon's posts and those of Tom and others associated with
                                                      > this
                                                      > > > forum, because they were able to leave behind the eckankar
                                                      > > overtones.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > From your analysis of my experiences and
                                                      > > visions,
                                                      > > > you simply are concocting a meaning. You don't know me and
                                                      > you
                                                      > > don't
                                                      > > > know the inner workings of my mind. So what you're doing is
                                                      > like a
                                                      > > > psychologist analyzing a patient and offering a diagnosis
                                                      > based on
                                                      > > a
                                                      > > > single letter the patient once wrote. It's just plain wrong
                                                      > to do.
                                                      > > It's
                                                      > > > not only flippant, but it's negligent as well.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > Regarding morimitsu, I would hazard to
                                                      > guess
                                                      > > that
                                                      > > > he was "handpicked" because he goes along with the
                                                      > perpetuation of
                                                      > > > klemp's program of lies, deceit and manipulation. He's a good
                                                      > > > candidate to work the lunacy pedals.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > The idea of coming up with explanations
                                                      > for
                                                      > > > experiences, especially those that are not your own, is sheer
                                                      > > folly.
                                                      > > > But equally ridiculous is the interpretation of one's own
                                                      > imagery
                                                      > > or
                                                      > > > "experiences" without critical thinking and, as I said in my
                                                      > > original
                                                      > > > post, without exhausting all other possible explanations.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > Eckankar does a good job at relieving
                                                      > people
                                                      > > of
                                                      > > > their critical minds and the earnest, unencumbered pursuit of
                                                      > > truth.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups. com,
                                                      > > > jonathanjohns96 <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > Harrison,
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > I believe you inner experiences were
                                                      > > real. And
                                                      > > > I believe that they were just for you. They were almost
                                                      > certainly
                                                      > > > telling you that "You are a master too." That is something
                                                      > that
                                                      > > Ford
                                                      > > > Johnson emphasized many times in his book. I mention Ford
                                                      > only
                                                      > > because
                                                      > > > a lot of people are familiar with him, but many people have
                                                      > not
                                                      > > had the
                                                      > > > time to read his book.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > So getting back to your inner
                                                      > > experiences.
                                                      > > > They were telling you "You are a master too." It's true that
                                                      > this
                                                      > > type
                                                      > > > of inner experience would not sit well with Klemp (to put it
                                                      > > mildly).
                                                      > > > So what was happening is that YOUR inner experiences (just
                                                      > for you
                                                      > > > only) were telling you that were you were getting close to
                                                      > the
                                                      > > time
                                                      > > > when you were ready to leave Eckankar. And I will caution you
                                                      > > about one
                                                      > > > thing. Just because the experiences were telling you that
                                                      > "You are
                                                      > > your
                                                      > > > own master" didn't mean that you should be an egomaniac and
                                                      > (1)
                                                      > > think
                                                      > > > that you are superior to others or (2) start your own
                                                      > religion. It
                                                      > > was
                                                      > > > just telling you (1) you are now the master of your own
                                                      > destiny
                                                      > > and (2)
                                                      > > > you don't need other masters and/or Eckankar anymore.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > From this point on I am no longer
                                                      > talking
                                                      > > > about you specifically, but rather engaging in a general
                                                      > > discussion.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > Regarding Phil Morimitsu. His book
                                                      > was
                                                      > > > hand-picked by Klemp because his experiences supported
                                                      > Twitchell's
                                                      > > > experiences, plus the general writings of Eckankar all the
                                                      > way.
                                                      > > The
                                                      > > > problem, as you evidently realize, is that many Eckists inner
                                                      > > > experiences are nothing like they are "supposed" to be. And
                                                      > worse
                                                      > > than
                                                      > > > that, when you ask the local HI or ESA about it, they
                                                      > generally
                                                      > > have no
                                                      > > > clue either. And asking Klemp on the Physical Plane what is
                                                      > going
                                                      > > on is
                                                      > > > the worst idea of all. Graham Forsyth learned all about that
                                                      > to
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > benefit of all of us who have also had inner experiences that
                                                      > > didn't
                                                      > > > match what Eckankar said they should be.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > I still remember something that I
                                                      > read on
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > Internet long before I left Eckankar. A man was telling a
                                                      > story
                                                      > > about
                                                      > > > how he joined Eckankar, did a soul travel exercise, and
                                                      > promptly
                                                      > > left
                                                      > > > his body. He was definitely somewhere, but as the
                                                      > emphatically put
                                                      > > it,
                                                      > > > he stated that Klemp was nowhere to be found!!! You know how
                                                      > the
                                                      > > > exercises always state that the master will be waiting for
                                                      > you
                                                      > > there.
                                                      > > > Well this guy was very upset that nobody was there!
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > So lots of people have inner
                                                      > experiences
                                                      > > > contrary to what Eckankar tells them is going to happen. And
                                                      > when
                                                      > > they
                                                      > > > do, there is no legitimate help from anyone in Eckankar. I
                                                      > think
                                                      > > it is
                                                      > > > actually a major reason why a lot of people leave Eckankar,
                                                      > but it
                                                      > > is
                                                      > > > rarely discussed. I have a theory that it is too personal, or
                                                      > > people
                                                      > > > are embarrassed to talk about it. I don't know. I'm not
                                                      > > specifically
                                                      > > > talking about you now. I'm just thinking out loud about
                                                      > possible
                                                      > > > reasons.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > I once told a fellow member that all
                                                      > the
                                                      > > books
                                                      > > > in Eckankar seemed namby pamby. This was after my inner
                                                      > > experiences
                                                      > > > made me feel that way. She recommended the book "The Rosetta
                                                      > Stone
                                                      > > Of
                                                      > > > God." I never read it, but evidently it wasn't your standard
                                                      > Eck
                                                      > > book.
                                                      > > > I later heard that the author left Eckankar. It seems to be
                                                      > > another
                                                      > > > example of somebody having different experiences, and before
                                                      > you
                                                      > > know
                                                      > > > it, they are leaving Eckankar.
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > Jonathan
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@ yahoogroups.
                                                      > com,
                                                      > > > harrisonferrel <no_reply@ > wrote:
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > When I was in Eckankar, I was
                                                      > > completely
                                                      > > > amazing, experience-wise. The stuff I used to dream and the
                                                      > > contents of
                                                      > > > my contemplations made me something superior to all human
                                                      > beings,
                                                      > > > including the masters and the living eck master. I was really
                                                      > > > something. I had "experiences" that showed in no uncertain
                                                      > terms
                                                      > > that
                                                      > > > the eck masters came to me for advice and consultation. I was
                                                      > on a
                                                      > > > throne and they were subservient to me. I was at all the
                                                      > major
                                                      > > events
                                                      > > > in the caves and caverns and secret spaces.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > So what do you do with this
                                                      > kind of
                                                      > > thing?
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > Luckily, I am not a deluded
                                                      > person,
                                                      > > a
                                                      > > > narcissist, a psychopath or a psychotic or other such order
                                                      > of
                                                      > > deranged
                                                      > > > characterizations. So these kinds of experiences set off a
                                                      > little
                                                      > > bell
                                                      > > > that made me question everything about eckankar and the
                                                      > deluded
                                                      > > nutjob
                                                      > > > pretenders from klemp to twitchell to morimitsu whose
                                                      > fantastic
                                                      > > > rantings are unbelievable because, frankly, they are
                                                      > > un-believe-able.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > When you have experiences that
                                                      > show
                                                      > > you
                                                      > > > to be downtrodden and unworthy, eckists, including klemp, are
                                                      > > quick to
                                                      > > > tell you it's because you need the light or some other such
                                                      > crap.
                                                      > > When
                                                      > > > you have the kind of experiences I had, they want nothing to
                                                      > do
                                                      > > with
                                                      > > > you. It makes you competition, or worse. What's worse? It
                                                      > scares
                                                      > > them
                                                      > > > because they know they are making their shit up, so it's
                                                      > scary and
                                                      > > > threatens to upset the whole cult.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > I've come to see past lives and
                                                      > all
                                                      > > other
                                                      > > > dreams and workings of the brain and imagination as unworthy
                                                      > of
                                                      > > much of
                                                      > > > my thought or attention. Clearly, a lot, if not all, of it is
                                                      > just
                                                      > > > nonsense and the workings of the mind. It has nothing to do
                                                      > with
                                                      > > any
                                                      > > > sense of reality here or elsewhere. Surely, a sincere mind
                                                      > would
                                                      > > want
                                                      > > > to exhaust all other possible explanation before landing upon
                                                      > a
                                                      > > > satisfying answer.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > Why people believe klemp,
                                                      > twitchell
                                                      > > or
                                                      > > > morimitsu is beyond the normal, discriminating, street smart
                                                      > mind.
                                                      > > It
                                                      > > > has only to do with being fooled and nothing else. I was
                                                      > amazed,
                                                      > > years
                                                      > > > ago when I read morimitsu's book as a monk. Years later I
                                                      > found a
                                                      > > > couple of similar books that predated his of very similar
                                                      > subject
                                                      > > > matter and experiences. Another twitchell in the making, I
                                                      > thought.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > Following my 12 year stint with
                                                      > > eckankar,
                                                      > > > I left and looked into just about every other possible
                                                      > explanation
                                                      > > for
                                                      > > > what eckankar teaches as being this or that. I found that
                                                      > > eckankar, as
                                                      > > > a cult, is all about massaging the truth, inventing
                                                      > definitions
                                                      > > for old
                                                      > > > words, lying to people and, of course, stealing (as evidenced
                                                      > in
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > writings of David Lane and many others, including the good
                                                      > people
                                                      > > in
                                                      > > > this particular posting group who have meticulously shown
                                                      > > innumerable
                                                      > > > plagiarisms that make up the foundation of eck teachings).
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > Serious delving into the human
                                                      > mind,
                                                      > > > Buddhism and psychology shows that what goes on in dreams and
                                                      > the
                                                      > > > imagination is not to be taken literally. Almost all of it is
                                                      > a
                                                      > > > metaphor. But to the unaware, eckankar provides an
                                                      > encouraging,
                                                      > > (and in
                                                      > > > too many cases) believable, explanation for past life
                                                      > "memories,"
                                                      > > out
                                                      > > > of body experiences, "inner" experiences and the like.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > I can only imagine that if
                                                      > harold
                                                      > > klemp
                                                      > > > had "inner experiences" anywhere close to the ones I've had
                                                      > he
                                                      > > would
                                                      > > > take them as real and allow them to merely boost his already
                                                      > > distorted
                                                      > > > sense of self.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > > > Eckankar is a disservice, to
                                                      > say the
                                                      > > > least, for anybody, especially those like us who entered the
                                                      > cult
                                                      > > with
                                                      > > > an earnest desire to learn, improve, expand, grow and become
                                                      > > better
                                                      > > > people by finding answers and techniques. I'll never agree
                                                      > with
                                                      > > the
                                                      > > > diagnosis that it is a harmless cult that has at least a some
                                                      > good
                                                      > > to
                                                      > > > give to its members. It's a jumbled waste of time with a liar
                                                      > and
                                                      > > cheat
                                                      > > > at the helm.
                                                      > > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > >
                                                      >
                                                    • jonathanjohns96
                                                      Note: This is an old thread that I am resurrecting. Yesterday, I accidentally ran into a lady from India whom I know a bit. She is a very intelligent lady from
                                                      Message 26 of 29 , Aug 3, 2010
                                                        Note: This is an old thread that I am resurrecting.

                                                        Yesterday, I accidentally ran into a lady from India whom I know a bit. She is a very intelligent lady from India who is from the state of Bihar. She is probably a Brahmin, but I am not certain of that.

                                                        I had to ask her one question "How many Hindus in India actually follow a Guru?" Her reply was "About 30%." She didn't hesitate in her answer. And she didn't act like it was a difficult question to answer.

                                                        That is the only answer I have so far, so that is the number I am personally going with for now.

                                                        I always like to get information from local citizens because I figure that they have a better idea than we Americans do.
                                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.