You Can Question in "eck"; you can't in eckankar
Colleen Russell
Thread begun by Ben Douglass, 10/1/2001.
I was made a "mahdis", higher initiate, by Paul Twitchell in 1970, after I
was extremely involved in helping him to start the eckankar movement. My
then husband and I attended the first eckankar satsang class which was held
at the home of Bob and Phyllis Libin in Studio City, CA. We started the
first eckankar center in L.A. and were involved in the first eckankar
seminars. Linda Lavaneri and I were co-directors of the first eckankar
youth seminar. I started a newsletter, "The Narrow Way," and was a Satsang
Leader (Arahata), and discussion group leader.
After I was given my 7th initiation by Darwin Gross in San Francisco, I left
eckankar because I could no longer tolerate the covert and overt rules and
functioning of eckankar. I was aware of the trade off I made to stay in
eckankar as a "higher initiate."
I questioned the reality I perceived of the "eck", which at some instances,
Twitchell/Gross/Klemp have stated is the eckankar term for "spirit", the
creative force of the universe, love, truth, beauty, wisdom, power.
But I couldn't question eckankar because of the way it was set up, and my
role in it.
I was given the title of "higher initiate" which carried with it the message
from the "living eck masters" that I had transcended the realm of illusion
and had reached the level of the "higher planes" in my state of
consciousness. This was the planes which the masters, beginning with
Twitchell, described in detail, supposedly from their experience in the
"eck", meaning "spirit." But they went further. Anyone who has the
initiation is expected to be in agreement with everything they said exists.
If you question or challenge the reality they've created, they have also
stated that you have fallen 'under the influence of the Kal, the negative
force of the universe."
Every initiate is caught in a bind. They either maintain their status as a
higher initiate through total agreement with the "living eck masters"
cosmology or they lose their it. There is no other way out. This is the
example of a "double bind" which Twitchell set up.
The only resolution for the one who is honest with him/herself is to sever
relationship with eckankar which also requires a major change in the
individual's and others perception of self. The ego doesn't have the hold
anymore on the "social lie" of eckankar which Twitchell taught me. If one
is invested in the ego, self-honesty and relinquishment of the "initiation"
in eckankar is perceived as a death.
But I believe that this "death" is an absolute necessity to continue one's
spiritual unfoldment and understanding.
Colleen
Colleen Russell
eckankar to obviously keep them in his control.
Twitchell/Gross/Klemp: What kind of role models are/were they?
Twitchell in Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad #2, pg. 166: "Woe be unto him if he does
(resign), for it is known among those who have reached these lofty heights
and witnessed the consequences of the few who have. Those few have found
that spiritual decay sets in immediately, affecting the health, material
life and spiritual life, and brings death more swiftly.")
"Colleen Russell" <colleen9> wrote in message
news:9pptur$ctg$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
cher
statement was written a great many years ago by the founder. Now days
the Mahanta the Living ECK Master has no problem with people leaving the
path of Eckankar. As a matter of fact, there is now a 5 year rest period
that people can take on the path if they feel it is needed.
Of course because the path has changed, and the person critcizing it has
been gone for so many years... these words will be seen as a huge excuse
rather then a simple fact of life. Oh well..... Maybe this is part of
the decay Paul was talking about all along? Who knows.... Only that
colleen and her friends have lost the ability to see change as a part of
ordinary normal life cycles.
Rich
their apparent meaning, as in the case of the orthodox scriptures. Of
what use would it be to forbid their revelation to the profane if their
secret meaning were contained in the literal sense of the language
usually employed? We must look upon the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad in the
following ways:
"As Soul is contained in the body in the beginning,
As the almond is hidden by it's hull,
As the sun is veiled by the clouds,
As the garments hide the body from view,
As the egg is contained in it's shell,
As the germ rest within the interior of the seed.
- Paul Twitchell Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad book II
I am aware that there are many approaches to SUGMAD, for nobody has a
monopoly on any path. The SUGMAD IS, and of course soul is, since latter
is a part of God. When we understand this truth, then we learn that all
a teacher can do is to put our feet upon a path and point the way. No
teach living or past, can give us the actual understanding of truth. It
is wholly dependent upon the individual to make his way to truth.
Paul Twitchell - ECKANKAR The Key to Secret Worlds
All paths ultimately lead to God, so do not be fretful if
another is not willing to see God as you see Him, nor look upon their
Sat Guru as you look upon Him, nor look upon this world as you look upon
it. All are traveling the path to God.
Paul Twitchell - Stranger by The River
"Those of you who want permission to follow another path have my
goodwill. The ECK has created as many avenues to Itself as
constellations light up the heavens at night. Each path is as precious
as another, for the Audible Life Stream makes no distinction in giving
Its profound, impartial love to Soul."
Sri Harold Klemp, Spring 1984
"There is one fact about religion, though: Your religion is best for
you right now. That's basically all you can say about any religion.
All you can speak about is your religion, and all you can say is that
it's either the best for you right now or it is not. If it is the
best for you, then you should be growing spiritually and enjoying
life."
"You should be learning things that help you develop more love and
compassion for other people in your family, and those you meet when
you're out and about in your daily life. That's if your religion is
working for you."
"If you're not doing these things, then find another one. Or leave
religion entirely and maybe listen to the voice of nature."
- Harold Klemp "How to Survive Spiritually in Our Times"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1570431671/qid=1000623537/sr=2-1/103-2162006-4422214
--
o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_ /____|___\_
(___________/
Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
brian Fletcher
"Colleen Russell" <colleen9> wrote in message
news:9pptur$ctg$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> role in it.
So typical. There is always a "giveaway"...Couldn't question !!!!
Some concept of "self realisation" you had
>
> I was given the title of "higher initiate" which carried with it the
message
> from the "living eck masters" that I had transcended the realm of illusion
> and had reached the level of the "higher planes" in my state of
> consciousness. This was the planes which the masters, beginning with
> Twitchell, described in detail, supposedly from their experience in the
> "eck", meaning "spirit." But they went further. Anyone who has the
> initiation is expected to be in agreement with everything they said
exists.
Reread the above..."Supposidely" from their experiences.
Did it 'NEVER' occur to you that your role was to see beyond the illusion
"for your self"
Your story is the same as anyone elses who is at the "following" stage....
They then tell others what they "did or do wrong"...
Brian
Rich
done in Eckankar.
Contrary to Colleen's view I always felt free to question the teachings
of Eckankar. I was at the First International Youth Conference Colleen
mentioned, and I heard Paul Twitchell say that we should not believe
anything he says or writes unless we have proved it to ourselves thru
our own experience.
Eckankar has taught me that being a higher initiate is not a title, but
an opportunity and position of responsibility.
I was never expected to be in agreement everything that Eckankar taught.
In fact I was taught to question and determine what was right and worked
for me. When I did question the teachings no one ever said that I had
"fallen under the influence of the Kal, the negative force of the
universe."
I never felt I was in any bind because I am not in "total agreement with
the "living ECK masters". I see that to gain mastership, I must make my
own decisions and not follow anyone.
The following is a repost of what I recently wrote to Colleen. It
addresses why she views Eckankar so different than most Eckists. She
has focused on the negative possibilities and rejected, suppressed or
forgot the rest, which in my view are the crux of the teachings.
Actually Colleen, again this "others" you refer to, is something that
you have told us that *you* did. And again, I will point out that my
experience was different, as is most of the Eckists I know. I didn't
view Paul Twitchell as the Orwellian "Ministry of Truth".
When I found contradictions I didn't fall into some kind of
psychological break and forget them. I didn't find I had to suppress
anything to maintain a connection with Paul Twitchell. For me it was
quite the opposite of your experience. I found several other options
besides some kind of mindless behavior.
I, as Paul suggested, simply used my own experience to judge for myself
what was the best path of belief for me, always knowing that further
experience may teach me better. If I couldn't decide, I merely put it
on the back burner and let it simmer 'til a bit of spice was added to
make it palatable, it burned away and I threw out both sides, or I
embraced the paradox(my favorite).
As I have pointed out to you many times before, you often "forgot" the
side of the contradiction that I chose and embraced in our early years
in Eckankar. Now years later you are here in this NG railing against
the choices you made as if everyone made and still makes those same
choices... as if there was no other options. There are lots of
contradictory views in Paul Twitchell's writings. So I am here to tell
you that there always where those choices of different beliefs and
views, because I took them.
So when you criticize the decisions you made long ago about how you
viewed the teachings of Eckankar, I agree. When you say how you see the
spiritual path now, I often agree because that's how I saw it then. I
made the choice of the contradictions then, but never forget the other
option, and so learned what that could mean too. My goal was, and still
is, to understand how both side of an issue can be understood from a
higher spiritual viewpoint. But when you say that Eckists are
brainwashed and follow cult programing, as you did, I disagree. When
you say that Eckankar/Eck Master purposefully manipulate Eckists for
selfish purposes, I disagree. When you say Eckist are not free and
encouraged to make their own decisions, I disagree. When you say these
kinds of things, I see you still locked into only one side of the
spectrum.
Sharon2000
> Once again an ECKist will step forth and remind colleen that this
> statement was written a great many years ago by the founder.
Uh, you're not being exactly accurate here, Grundie.
Let's get the quote back up here:
> > Twitchell in Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad #2, pg. 166: "Woe be unto him if he
> > does (resign), for it is known among those who have reached these lofty
> > heights and witnessed the consequences of the few who have. Those few
> > have found that spiritual decay sets in immediately, affecting the
> > health, material life and spiritual life, and brings death more
> > swiftly.")
Now---let's see what the intro page to the SKS says:
"The Ancient Scriptures of ECKANKAR, the Ancient Science of Soul Travel
brought to light for the first time.
These writings of golden wisdom which have always been hidden in the
spiritual worlds have now been translated and published for the first time.
Book Two is the second section of the works of The SHARIYAT-KI-SUGMAD which
was dictated by Yaubl Sacabi, the great ECK Master, at the Gare-Hire Temple
of Wisdom at Agam Des in the Himalaya Mountains.
The SHARIYAT-KI-SUGMAD contains the wisdom and ecstatic knowledge of those
planes of the spiritual worlds, beyond the regions of time and space. To
read and study this highly inspired book will give the reader an insight
into the scriptures of the Temples of Golden Wisdom.
The essence of God knowledge is laid down in these writings. Those who
follow ECK are involved in The SHARIYAT-KI-SUGMAD for it is their bible,
the everlasting gospel. all worldly docgtrines on religions, philosophies,
and sacred writings are the offsprings of The SHARIYAT-KI-SUGMAD."
> Now days
> the Mahanta the Living ECK Master has no problem with people leaving the
> path of Eckankar.
Sure he does, Grundie. He tries to appear "nice" about it, but you
yourself, along with the other cult members, have expressed your silly
cultic belief that ha ha, us former members are going to have a lot of
karma to pay back. <ggg> You all believe what your cult teaches, that
maybe people may leave, but they're wandering in astral hell and can't get
to God until they return to the cult, and submit to the LEM. Do you want
quotes? I can provide them, you know. "New" ones, from Harold.
As a matter of fact, there is now a 5 year rest period
> that people can take on the path if they feel it is needed.
>
Sure...all that "spiritual growth" can get rough! <ggg>
And the member knows quite well that if they take a "rest" they're going
to be "falling behind" in spiritual consciousness, while the rest of the
cult members keep zooming away higher and higher, and if you don't renew
your membership, after five years....KABOOM!!! You have returned to the
consciousness of a rock. Your initiations are lost. You have to take all
the "secret holey discourses" all over again.
The cult has most certainly *not* changed its teachings which tell members
that they have *always* been with the LEM, and have made the mistake of
leaving many times before, and if they do it again, well <shrug> they
*will* have to return.
> Of course because the path has changed, and the person critcizing it has
> been gone for so many years... these words will be seen as a huge excuse
> rather then a simple fact of life. Oh well..... Maybe this is part of
> the decay Paul was talking about all along? Who knows.... Only that
> colleen and her friends have lost the ability to see change as a part of
> ordinary normal life cycles.
>
No, Grundie, the "path" has NOT changed...only become a bit more subtle,
using new marketing techniques, trying to appear mainstream & acceptable to
more potential recruits.
The threats are still there.
Sharon
> Colleen Russell wrote:
> >
> > One of many examples of the bind Twitchell created for the initiates of
> > eckankar to obviously keep them in his control.
> >
> > Twitchell/Gross/Klemp: What kind of role models are/were they?
> >
> > Twitchell in Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad #2, pg. 166: "Woe be unto him if he
> > does (resign), for it is known among those who have reached these lofty
> > heights and witnessed the consequences of the few who have. Those few
> > have found that spiritual decay sets in immediately, affecting the
> > health, material life and spiritual life, and brings death more
> > swiftly.")
--
http://www.geocities.com/eckcult
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1756/eck.txt
http://www.delphi.com/eckankartruth
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth
http://www.stormpages.com/truthbeknown66/
cher
considering the fact that you know what I should be and am thinking
regardless of what I say. Archie Bunker was cute in the 70's but just no
longer timely. In other words, I find you passé.
cheryl.........
Sharon2000 wrote:
>
> cher <gruen...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > Once again an ECKist will step forth and remind colleen that this
> > statement was written a great many years ago by the founder.
>
> Uh, you're not being exactly accurate here, Grundie.
<snip the standard rant of shazzzz>
Colleen Russell
My experience of eckankar is consistent with many others who have left, so
there has to be something worth investigating.
Colleen
"Rich" <rsm...@aloha.net> wrote in message news:3BC0EC...@aloha.net...
Rich
Here are the elements you can see in most of her posts.
She calls Eckists brainwashed or untruthful.
She say the ECK Masters are lying.
She assumes that her interpretation of the Eckankar literature is the
only acceptable criteria, more important that anyone's inner reality,
and will manipulate out of context quotes to 'prove' her point.
She uses her own arsenal of made up snarl/spit words.
She likes to invoke Hitler and now Bin Laden
She will tells Eckists what they believe.
She will misrepresent what Eckists say.
She demonstrates her lack of knowledge about what Eckankar teaches.
She'll attempt to put her own experiences, which she now detests, into
the mouths and minds of Eckists as if thy really think and feel the same
thing... even when repeatedly told that is not what they believe.
If her extreme portrayal of Eckankar were true, I wouldn't, nor likely
would anyone be a member.
Check this link to find out the shocking reality of what Sharon says
about herself and her non-involvement in the Eckankar teachings.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3BB42908.6EA5%40aloha.net
--
o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_ /____|___\_
(___________/
Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
Rich
> Just one quick comment, Rich...
>
> there has to be something worth investigating.
I agree. I would be interesting to find what commonality exist between
those that have perceptions so far skewed from the majority of how
Eckankar is experienced by normal everyday people.
Thanks again for demonstrating your inability to face or address the
issues I bring up about my experience.
Carly
public forum. I guess the dirty laundry
is just out there in her front yard blowing in the breeze. You'd think a
person would have a little more self-esteem than to tell all this
unfortunate crap. Of course telling this stuff could be just the good things
that happened to her. I'd sure hate to see what lies in the closets of that
family.
"Rich" <rsm...@aloha.net> wrote in message news:3BC224...@aloha.net...
Joe
> Colleen Russell wrote:
>
> > Just one quick comment, Rich...
> >
> > My experience of Eckankar is consistent with many others who have left, so
> > there has to be something worth investigating.
>
> I agree. I would be interesting to find what commonality exist between
> those that have perceptions so far skewed from the majority of how
> Eckankar is experienced by normal everyday people.
>
> Thanks again for demonstrating your inability to face or address the
> issues I bring up about my experience.
Doesn't address or face the issues? Maybe they're not worth a reply?
Oh well, allow me Rich:
> --
> o
> |
> ~/|
> _/ |\
> / | \
> -/ | \
> _ /____|___\_
> (___________/
> Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(btw -- this boat-sig is as dorky as elephant bells. sorry, someone
had to tell you)
> > Colleen
> > "Rich" <rsm...@aloha.net> wrote in message news:3BC0EC...@aloha.net...
> > > It's of note that you don't see any Eckist bragging about what they have
> > > done in Eckankar.
Actually, Paul Twitchell was a notorious braggart, as was Darwin Gross
-- read their bios.
Paulji went so far as to lie, repeatedly and in technicolor, about his
accomplishments, travels, and associations. And he plagiarized too.
Darwin, in the now rare FROM HEAVEN TO THE PRAIRIE, painted a bold
picture of himself, i think perhaps with help from an associate eck
org author. In any case, he authorized publication of that bio, as
did Paulji with IN MY SOUL I AM FREE.
Then there's Harold -- how many bios has he written? What does he say
about himself in them? Does he not seem to always come out on top, in
every tale he tells about himself?
Did his last bio have the title A MODERN PROPHET?
Didn't Harold read a grandiose account of his spiritual experiences
before a crowd of Eckists at a eck seminar?
Don't all Eckists recognize the much Trumpted ECK INITIATIONS as a
real deal? Initiations that even in the lower stages, put one on a
spiritual level above Christ and Buddha? That's how the schema was
laid out by Paulji!
Yes, this is all true.
Colleen is no braggart -- she merely stated her status and involement
level in eckankar.
Something that Rich Smith, who declined to admit he's an Eck
Clergyman, is afraid to do.
I wager that Colleen did MORE for Eckankar than Rich, Ken, or the
other online zeros fighting the good fight of trying to wipe out eck
criticism on the net.
> > >
> > > Contrary to Colleen's view I always felt free to question the teachings
> > > of Eckankar. I was at the First International Youth Conference Colleen
> > > mentioned, and I heard Paul Twitchell say that we should not believe
> > > anything he says or writes unless we have proved it to ourselves thru
> > > our own experience.
Which is why certain Eck clergy are afraid to say whether they believe
Paulji DID go to India, or not!
> > >
> > > Eckankar has taught me that being a higher initiate is not a title, but
> > > an opportunity and position of responsibility.
Shouldn't that responsibility at least BEGIN with ADMITING whether you
are an HI, or a member of Eck's Clergy?
Are you saying that every Eck Clergyman who discloses their initiation
level is a "braggart" Rich?
Be careful here.
> > >
> > > I was never expected to be in agreement everything that Eckankar taught.
> > > In fact I was taught to question and determine what was right and worked
> > > for me. When I did question the teachings no one ever said that I had
> > > "fallen under the influence of the Kal, the negative force of the
> > > universe."
Yes, someone did say that to you: Paul Twitchell.
Read the Shariyat, see what it says about those who criticize Eckankar
or the LEM.
Deal with that.
Blame that, if you must blame something or someone.
Get responsible for eck lit and what it presently says to the eckist.
Grow up. Stop blaming eck critics for pointing out eckankar's faults.
> > >
> > > I never felt I was in any bind because I am not in "total agreement with
> > > the "living ECK masters". I see that to gain mastership, I must make my
> > > own decisions and not follow anyone.
and one of those decision was to accept Clergy status in ECKANKAR, a
religious organization that claims the Shariyat Ki Sugmad is its
"bible," and which claims that Harold Klemp is the most spiritually
evolved and powerful being on the planet.
The Shariyat also spells out your relationship with the LEM/Mahanta
Rich.
If you choose to ignore that, that's fine. But I really doubt if you
do.
Ken
"Joe" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote ...
<smips>
Whoa, there's a revelation: Joe doesn't like Paul, Harold or Eckankar.
cher
email addy. Oh well... :-)
Joe
> "Joe" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote ...
>
> <smips>
>
> Whoa, there's a revelation: Joe doesn't like Paul, Harold or Eckankar.
Joe doesn't like Paul, Harold, or Eckankar.
Kens luvs em, right or wrong!
But does Ken luv Joe?