Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman
151 views
Skip to first unread message
Etznab
Jan 18, 2013, 8:29:02 PM1/18/13
to
Based on: Old T.S. post from January 3rd, 2004
***
Doug Marman
1/3/2004
Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman
USUALLY SKEPTIKAL WROTE:
> Dear Doug,
>
> I found your response and Ford's interesting. However, could you answer me
> about your connections to Paul Twitchell, Darwin Gross, Harold Klemp and
> Eckankar? Are you a member of Eckankar now or have you ever been?
>
> Could you also fill me in on how Lane misinterpretated Harold's Astral
> Library story? I don't recall Twitchell ever mentioning an Astral Library.
>
> Thank You,
> Usually Skeptical
I worked at the ECK Office first when it was located in Las Vegas. I started there about one year after Darwin became the Master. He was one of the most humble people back then.
I worked on a number of projects with him and got to know him personally.
I talk about this in my Internet book. One of the projects I took on was to organize Paul's orginal taped talks, which had been abandoned in a loft there. It was a mess. I listened to everyone of Paul's talks at least a dozen times, as I tried to sort out when and where it took place, and to splice them back together into their original form.
I met Harold there in 1973. He left for a year before coming back to work at the ECK Office. He and I became close friends. Neither of us were much interested in the office politics, but loved talking about the spiritual teachings.
I just happened to be there at the office when David Lane was first writing his book, so I could comment firsthand on many things. I also kept a complete set of the ECK publications from the start of ECKANKAR, which I got when I was there, so I could get actual quotes and the facts of the early days.
I have been a member since then, however, I currently hold no position in the organization and wrote my book completely on my own and not trying to represent anyone else but myself and my own understanding.
Years later, when Harold became the Master, he gave me a chance to go through Paul's library and files, after they have been retrieved from Darwin's home. I learned a lot more about Paul there.
Since I joined ECKANKAR, I've had a recurring dream about looking for old writings of Paul, back before ECKANKAR. I talk about the search this led me on in the last chapter of my book.
As for the Astral library dream, this is unfortunate that it has become misunderstood in this way. I cover this in my book as well. I know that some could say that I am just offering another interpretation, but how do I know my interpretation is the correct one? The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well.
If you read Harold's actual words, you will see that David Lane is wrong. Harold does not anywhere in his talk say that Paul got his information from the Astral Library, therefore it was not plagiarism. Harold never says that. What Harold does say is that the Astral Library is a source of great wisdom that some of the greatest writers have access to it. It is an inner source of truth about the path. Also, from the information there, Harold could see the sources of all of Paul's books, since it was all in the records there.
The point of this is that you can't fool the records in the Astral Library. It was clear there that Paul had borrowed from other writers. That's the point of Harold's story. That's why he was talking about Paul as a Compiler at the beginning of the talk, and that we need to take him down off the pedestal as a god and see that he was a man. Harold called this the death of an ideal. Harold talks about the stages that people go through in accepting a death in the family - rejecting the idea, then anger, then confusion and doubt, then disillusionment, then acceptance - or something like that. All this was because plagiarism is not the way we want to see Paul. That was all in the same talk, concluding with Harold talking about his dream in the Astral Library where he finally saw Paul.
Here's how Harold ends his talk:
"I'm doing all this research in a soundproof booth so it doesn't disturb the other people who are doing research. As I look over at a table, I see Paul--busy as usual, researching and writing. He looks at me and says, kind of gruffly, "What's that?"
" 'Source manuscripts, ' I say.
" 'For what? ' he asks.
" 'To show where a lot of the ECK writings on earth came from, ' I reply.
" 'Oh, ' he says. 'Well, we'll have to do something about that someday. '
"Then he picks up his notebook and leaves, heading out into the stacks.
"Yeah, I thought to myself, and I know who is going to have to do something about that someday! "
Here is what David Lane said in his book:
Simply put, Klemp has invented a story to cover-up Twitchell's plagiarism so that Eckankar can still get away with publishing "stolen" materials.
In fact, the point Harold was making was the exact opposite. Harold was breaking the news to ECKists that Paul borrowed and copied. That was the very thing he was studying in his dream.
David Lane challenged me on my interpretation, and we had some long dialogues about it. The whole of Harold's talk makes sense if you see it as I'm explaining. It doesn't make sense if Harold is trying to explain that it wasn't plagiarism after all because Paul got it all from the Astral. Then why would Harold need to clean up a mess?
But the real problem here is simply that Harold never said what David accused him of saying. Harold never even suggests it. It was simply a mistaken interpretation.
David wasn't the only one to make this mistake. I can see why some might draw the wrong conclusion, but since I had firsthand experience with it, I know that the last thing Harold was trying to do was cover something up. Quite the opposite.
I hope this helps.
Thanks.
Doug Marman.
***
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
***
Doug Marman
1/3/2004
Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman
USUALLY SKEPTIKAL WROTE:
> Dear Doug,
>
> I found your response and Ford's interesting. However, could you answer me
> about your connections to Paul Twitchell, Darwin Gross, Harold Klemp and
> Eckankar? Are you a member of Eckankar now or have you ever been?
>
> Could you also fill me in on how Lane misinterpretated Harold's Astral
> Library story? I don't recall Twitchell ever mentioning an Astral Library.
>
> Thank You,
> Usually Skeptical
I worked at the ECK Office first when it was located in Las Vegas. I started there about one year after Darwin became the Master. He was one of the most humble people back then.
I worked on a number of projects with him and got to know him personally.
I talk about this in my Internet book. One of the projects I took on was to organize Paul's orginal taped talks, which had been abandoned in a loft there. It was a mess. I listened to everyone of Paul's talks at least a dozen times, as I tried to sort out when and where it took place, and to splice them back together into their original form.
I met Harold there in 1973. He left for a year before coming back to work at the ECK Office. He and I became close friends. Neither of us were much interested in the office politics, but loved talking about the spiritual teachings.
I just happened to be there at the office when David Lane was first writing his book, so I could comment firsthand on many things. I also kept a complete set of the ECK publications from the start of ECKANKAR, which I got when I was there, so I could get actual quotes and the facts of the early days.
I have been a member since then, however, I currently hold no position in the organization and wrote my book completely on my own and not trying to represent anyone else but myself and my own understanding.
Years later, when Harold became the Master, he gave me a chance to go through Paul's library and files, after they have been retrieved from Darwin's home. I learned a lot more about Paul there.
Since I joined ECKANKAR, I've had a recurring dream about looking for old writings of Paul, back before ECKANKAR. I talk about the search this led me on in the last chapter of my book.
As for the Astral library dream, this is unfortunate that it has become misunderstood in this way. I cover this in my book as well. I know that some could say that I am just offering another interpretation, but how do I know my interpretation is the correct one? The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well.
If you read Harold's actual words, you will see that David Lane is wrong. Harold does not anywhere in his talk say that Paul got his information from the Astral Library, therefore it was not plagiarism. Harold never says that. What Harold does say is that the Astral Library is a source of great wisdom that some of the greatest writers have access to it. It is an inner source of truth about the path. Also, from the information there, Harold could see the sources of all of Paul's books, since it was all in the records there.
The point of this is that you can't fool the records in the Astral Library. It was clear there that Paul had borrowed from other writers. That's the point of Harold's story. That's why he was talking about Paul as a Compiler at the beginning of the talk, and that we need to take him down off the pedestal as a god and see that he was a man. Harold called this the death of an ideal. Harold talks about the stages that people go through in accepting a death in the family - rejecting the idea, then anger, then confusion and doubt, then disillusionment, then acceptance - or something like that. All this was because plagiarism is not the way we want to see Paul. That was all in the same talk, concluding with Harold talking about his dream in the Astral Library where he finally saw Paul.
Here's how Harold ends his talk:
"I'm doing all this research in a soundproof booth so it doesn't disturb the other people who are doing research. As I look over at a table, I see Paul--busy as usual, researching and writing. He looks at me and says, kind of gruffly, "What's that?"
" 'Source manuscripts, ' I say.
" 'For what? ' he asks.
" 'To show where a lot of the ECK writings on earth came from, ' I reply.
" 'Oh, ' he says. 'Well, we'll have to do something about that someday. '
"Then he picks up his notebook and leaves, heading out into the stacks.
"Yeah, I thought to myself, and I know who is going to have to do something about that someday! "
Here is what David Lane said in his book:
Simply put, Klemp has invented a story to cover-up Twitchell's plagiarism so that Eckankar can still get away with publishing "stolen" materials.
In fact, the point Harold was making was the exact opposite. Harold was breaking the news to ECKists that Paul borrowed and copied. That was the very thing he was studying in his dream.
David Lane challenged me on my interpretation, and we had some long dialogues about it. The whole of Harold's talk makes sense if you see it as I'm explaining. It doesn't make sense if Harold is trying to explain that it wasn't plagiarism after all because Paul got it all from the Astral. Then why would Harold need to clean up a mess?
But the real problem here is simply that Harold never said what David accused him of saying. Harold never even suggests it. It was simply a mistaken interpretation.
David wasn't the only one to make this mistake. I can see why some might draw the wrong conclusion, but since I had firsthand experience with it, I know that the last thing Harold was trying to do was cover something up. Quite the opposite.
I hope this helps.
Thanks.
Doug Marman.
***
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Etznab
Jan 18, 2013, 8:50:18 PM1/18/13
to
"The point of this is that you can't fool the records in the Astral Library. It was clear there that Paul had borrowed from other writers. That's the point of Harold's story. That's why he was talking about Paul as a Compiler at the beginning of the talk, and that we need to take him down off the pedestal as a god and see that he was a man. Harold called this the death of an ideal. Harold talks about the stages that people go through in accepting a death in the family - rejecting the idea, then anger, then confusion and doubt, then disillusionment, then acceptance - or something like that. All this was because plagiarism is not the way we want to see Paul. That was all in the same talk, concluding with Harold talking about his dream in the Astral Library where he finally saw Paul."
***
Some music and waking dreams. From 1971 and 1981.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts193VvyDGw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7gJWB9OEe8
Message has been deleted
Etznab
Jan 19, 2013, 5:54:39 PM1/19/13
to
On Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:38:51 PM UTC-6, johnr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, January 18, 2013 Etznab denounced Eckankar and settled for:
>
>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts193VvyDGw
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7gJWB9OEe8
>
>
>
> ==================
>
> I do not care. I am not a member of Eckankar.
>
>
>
> Your narcissistic smear campaign of Eckankar becomes you, Richard Etznab; not Eckankar's thankful members past and present or myself.
>
>
>
> Plagiarism is not a sin; nor is it illegal. Your narcissistic lack of objectivity even fails to compare your ethic outside the US in other literary domains such as Russia, China, Egypt, South Africa and Southeast Asia.
>
>
>
> Neither have you or anyone else proven Academics themselves, such as Lane, do not plagiarize. In fact plagiarism is legal for professors who cop their students' outside perceptions which is why older students (experience) are most likely to be discriminated against in grading.
>
>
>
> You and your cuddle buddy have yet to prove Eckankar is a fraud based on your jaded experiences and disappointments. "From the love of objects of the senses man has desires; from his desires rises anger. From anger proceeds delusion, and from delusion comes confused memories and senses. This destroys his love of God and from all this he perishes." [Matter of fact; not projection] "But when he is disciplined and places his love in the Mahanta [not a personality] then does he move among the object of his senses free from pleasures and free from pain, but mostly freedom from self-indulgence."
>
>
>
> The opinions of those few writers Paul Twitchell borrowed his "cup of sugar" from are just as valid coming from Paul and Eckankar as they are from the original authors. Your and your cuddle buddy's false arguments have projected themselves as pretense onto Eckankar and its membership disguised as "documentation." Documentation of what? Your ignorance.
>
>
>
> If not only I, then the whole world must be waiting to see who the authors claimed to be the originators of these texts may have plagiarized. You have not even checked for plagiarism from other languages and India has over 32 different tongues.
>
>
>
> Wash your hands. Do a parasite cleanse. Wash them again. Repeat.
The opinions of those few writers Paul Twitchell borrowed his "cup of sugar" from are just as valid coming from Paul and Eckankar as they are from the original authors.
***
I disagree. They are not just as valid. Not all of them. And those authors gave more than simply opinions ... when their writings included history as well, or the statement of facts.
And the examples of what Paul Twitchell and Eckankar had coming from Eck Masters??? Do the Eck Masters, like Rebazar Tarzs, plagiarize? Do the Eck Masters appropriate writings of other people? (including copyrighted materials) change the words around and then claim those as their own? Creating pseudo religion and history in the process? How comes it that pseudo man-made history and religion is just as valid as natural events and the actual truth?
Don't forget the many, many examples claiming that it was not Paul Twitchell alone who authored the Eckankar writings. According to the stories, Eck Masters were behind this too. Chiefly, Rebazar Tarzs.
This looks to me like something more than simply plagiarism.
> On Friday, January 18, 2013 Etznab denounced Eckankar and settled for:
>
>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts193VvyDGw
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7gJWB9OEe8
>
>
>
> ==================
>
> I do not care. I am not a member of Eckankar.
>
>
>
> Your narcissistic smear campaign of Eckankar becomes you, Richard Etznab; not Eckankar's thankful members past and present or myself.
>
>
>
> Plagiarism is not a sin; nor is it illegal. Your narcissistic lack of objectivity even fails to compare your ethic outside the US in other literary domains such as Russia, China, Egypt, South Africa and Southeast Asia.
>
>
>
> Neither have you or anyone else proven Academics themselves, such as Lane, do not plagiarize. In fact plagiarism is legal for professors who cop their students' outside perceptions which is why older students (experience) are most likely to be discriminated against in grading.
>
>
>
> You and your cuddle buddy have yet to prove Eckankar is a fraud based on your jaded experiences and disappointments. "From the love of objects of the senses man has desires; from his desires rises anger. From anger proceeds delusion, and from delusion comes confused memories and senses. This destroys his love of God and from all this he perishes." [Matter of fact; not projection] "But when he is disciplined and places his love in the Mahanta [not a personality] then does he move among the object of his senses free from pleasures and free from pain, but mostly freedom from self-indulgence."
>
>
>
> The opinions of those few writers Paul Twitchell borrowed his "cup of sugar" from are just as valid coming from Paul and Eckankar as they are from the original authors. Your and your cuddle buddy's false arguments have projected themselves as pretense onto Eckankar and its membership disguised as "documentation." Documentation of what? Your ignorance.
>
>
>
> If not only I, then the whole world must be waiting to see who the authors claimed to be the originators of these texts may have plagiarized. You have not even checked for plagiarism from other languages and India has over 32 different tongues.
>
>
>
> Wash your hands. Do a parasite cleanse. Wash them again. Repeat.
The opinions of those few writers Paul Twitchell borrowed his "cup of sugar" from are just as valid coming from Paul and Eckankar as they are from the original authors.
***
I disagree. They are not just as valid. Not all of them. And those authors gave more than simply opinions ... when their writings included history as well, or the statement of facts.
And the examples of what Paul Twitchell and Eckankar had coming from Eck Masters??? Do the Eck Masters, like Rebazar Tarzs, plagiarize? Do the Eck Masters appropriate writings of other people? (including copyrighted materials) change the words around and then claim those as their own? Creating pseudo religion and history in the process? How comes it that pseudo man-made history and religion is just as valid as natural events and the actual truth?
Don't forget the many, many examples claiming that it was not Paul Twitchell alone who authored the Eckankar writings. According to the stories, Eck Masters were behind this too. Chiefly, Rebazar Tarzs.
This looks to me like something more than simply plagiarism.
Etznab
Jan 19, 2013, 10:55:04 PM1/19/13
to
From an old T.S. B.B. post.
"[....] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. [....]" - A Few Responses - Doug Marman - February 8th, 2004
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264
I was under the impression that Harold Klemp was never so straight forward as was Doug Marman on this subject. However ...
"Paul had an uncanny knack for depicting the human condition through the writings left by other authors. But he took their efforts a step further. He recast the seed ideas so they fit into a grander, more compelling spiritual framework. He artfully presented the subject of the power of imagination as Soul’s peculiar talent for survival in every universe of creation."
- Excerpt from: Behind the Scenes with Paul Twitchell, Harold Klemp
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/behindscenes.html
Recast the seed ideas so they fit into a grander, more compelling spiritual framework?
Umm ... now I'm thinking ... perhaps "that's what it's all about"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfPg_GzC-HA
Message has been deleted
Etznab
Sep 7, 2017, 10:09:26 AM9/7/17
to
Etznab
Sep 7, 2017, 10:21:28 AM9/7/17
to
Etznab
Sep 7, 2017, 10:53:53 AM9/7/17
to
On Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 9:09:26 AM UTC-5, Etznab wrote:
Doug writes:
"Years later, when Harold became the Master, he gave me a chance to go through Paul's library and files, after they have been retrieved from Darwin's home. I learned a lot more about Paul there."
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/hfDu3l93xxU/s0oDVebTyEkJ
"Years later, when Harold became the Master, he gave me a chance to go through Paul's library and files, after they have been retrieved from Darwin's home. I learned a lot more about Paul there."
Henosis Sage
Sep 8, 2017, 10:20:38 AM9/8/17
to
What? From Paul's outer WRITINGS, and Paul's personal ARCHIVE of documented records, and letters, and audio tapes .... and stuff?
Like Doug Marman didn't simply dial up Paul on the inner, or RT, or Gail T, nor check the great inner library records for the real "letter of truth"?
My, I'm shocked.
Maran could have learned a lot of Paul in 1983 if he had access to this document back then ....
He certainly wouldn't have any excuse for being sdo wrong, for making so many assumptions absent any evidence to claim X was true when it was in fact FALSE.
So why didn't Rebazar or Peddar or Wah Z or Duane the Great Writer set him straight?
I mean Etznab this is the SAME GUY slashing at you while he ASSUMES you do not have any experience with these great eckankar masters , right? Well where is Marman's access to such inner truths about Paul Twitchell all these years?
They are no where to be seen .... bloody bullshit artist, that's all Marman is. So bent out of shape you could sell him at Xmas as a Pretzel!
Henosis Sage
Sep 8, 2017, 10:23:29 AM9/8/17
to
This one - [TEHA 2014] DWTM Dialogues with the Master PLAGIARISM by Paul Twitchell
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-M0yAR0UPhPSXlQVUwxbTFyenc
or even this one -
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-M0yAR0UPhPTDduWlQzdXpGQ2M
Henosis Sage
Sep 8, 2017, 10:29:15 AM9/8/17
to
Yes, well Harold was 'detained' -- literally detained -- ordered into a psychiatric institution and what not -- None of this made it into his IRO (monthly report) nor did he ever mention it to Darwin personally.
I guess he never mentioned this claimed 'God Realization experience' to Doug either back in 1973 or since. One had to buy the book first~! ;-O
Tisra Til
Sep 8, 2017, 5:08:14 PM9/8/17
to
That's funny. Last night I was reading The Power Of Awareness by Neville, and the first three pages are in TKTE, on pages 5 and 6, highlighted in yellow, in the last link. They aren't verbatim, but the sentences and paragraphs have obviously been reordered, with a few words changed or added. Such as, "the master said", or "the master continued," or "throughout the scriptures of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad". Attributing words and sentences to Rebazar Tarzs.
How original!
How original!
Henosis Sage
Sep 9, 2017, 7:48:14 AM9/9/17
to
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 07:08:14 UTC+10, Tisra Til wrote:
> That's funny. Last night I was reading The Power Of Awareness by Neville, and the first three pages are in TKTE, on pages 5 and 6, highlighted in yellow, in the last link. They aren't verbatim, but the sentences and paragraphs have obviously been reordered, with a few words changed or added. Such as, "the master said", or "the master continued," or "throughout the scriptures of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad". Attributing words and sentences to Rebazar Tarzs.
>
> How original!
Yes, not! :-)
> That's funny. Last night I was reading The Power Of Awareness by Neville, and the first three pages are in TKTE, on pages 5 and 6, highlighted in yellow, in the last link. They aren't verbatim, but the sentences and paragraphs have obviously been reordered, with a few words changed or added. Such as, "the master said", or "the master continued," or "throughout the scriptures of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad". Attributing words and sentences to Rebazar Tarzs.
>
> How original!
But according to Marman et al it's Etznab who has "the problem".
Really gripes my cookie.
Henosis Sage
Sep 9, 2017, 7:54:34 AM9/9/17
to
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 07:08:14 UTC+10, Tisra Til wrote:
> That's funny. Last night I was reading The Power Of Awareness by Neville, and the first three pages are in TKTE, on pages 5 and 6, highlighted in yellow, in the last link. They aren't verbatim, but the sentences and paragraphs have obviously been reordered, with a few words changed or added. Such as, "the master said", or "the master continued," or "throughout the scriptures of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad". Attributing words and sentences to Rebazar Tarzs.
>
> How original!
AND what a great little "coincidence" there. You're in the "zone" without even making an effort.
>
> How original!
Of course people like you, etznab and myself cannot have ANY genuine spiritual inner connections insights awareness or guidance at all. Poor ol' etznab et al well they don;t cut because they have not had the great one on one experiences with those wonderful eck masters like Marman, Klemp, and Paul Twitchell et al apparently had or CLAIM they have. (sheesh!)
Meanwhile dick heads like that kinpoop wax lyrical about seeing people shitting their pants or vomiting drunk - literally - which definitely shows where his "spiritual head is at" ... parked right next door to Marman's genius apparently.
sorry i could go on and on the crap these people have thrown at others while crying in their socks for being "insulted" or "ridiculed" while ABUSING AND PUTTING DOWN EVERYONE IN SIGHT WHO DOES NOT DANCE TO THEIR RIDICULOUS DISTORTED DISHONEST AND DECEITFUL PIED PIPER TUNES ...
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 7:57:30 AM9/9/17
to
In the spirit of dialogue take a read of the following. Try to set aside the Astral Library part for now (I'll revisit that later) and just look at the main part of the following.
"The point of this is that you can't fool the records in the Astral Library. It was clear there that Paul had borrowed from other writers. That's the point of Harold's story. That's why he was talking about Paul as a Compiler at the beginning of the talk, and that we need to take him down off the pedestal as a god and see that he was a man. Harold called this the death of an ideal. Harold talks about the stages that people go through in accepting a death in the family - rejecting the idea, then anger, then confusion and doubt, then disillusionment, then acceptance - or something like that. All this was because plagiarism is not the way we want to see Paul. That was all in the same talk, concluding with Harold talking about his dream in the Astral Library where he finally saw Paul."
About those stages for death of an ideal that Harold spelled out, it's amazing that Doug's memory can't handle those. It is important to spell them out here since I want to show how I suspect Doug is in the denial stage; a stage he so conveniently forgot to mention!!!
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 7:59:15 AM9/9/17
to
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 8:02:18 AM9/9/17
to
"The first feeling that comes at the death of an ideal is denial: Tell me it ain't so. The second stage is anger. In the third stage, a person wants to bargain: Maybe we can mediate this—isn't there a way it can be worked out? Next comes depression, and finally, acceptance."
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 8:07:43 AM9/9/17
to
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 8:49:23 AM9/9/17
to
Taking a look back through a.r.e. archives and across the Internet I find a lot of examples. Some (but certainly not all) might include:
1.) It's Darwin and his people at fault.
2.) It's that David Lane character. He must have it wrong.
3.) It's all those non-members, or X-members. It's all those "weeds".
4.) It's that Etznab character who said he spent over ten years researching the subject, found further examples of plagiarism that nobody knew of and listed them along with a keyword, a number, (41391720) for easy location.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/alt.religion.eckankar/41391720;context-place=forum/alt.religion.eckankar
5.) It's that Sean character who also spent over ten years researching. Who has reams and reams of files (enough to wrap several mumies). Who (he and his wife) found materials hardly anybody knew about and contributed much to the clarity of what exactly Paul wrote vs. what other people wrote.
Some of the other Eckankar spin-off paths, they too (they and their leaders) have their own forms of placing blame.
6.) It's Harold's fault. He didn't do what I (Darwin Gross) and him agreed upon.
7.) It's Harold's fault. (He's an alien, or something. Taplining, whatever). It's Harold and Eckankar's fault, but since I (Duane) am such a "great writer" I'll just rewrite the Eckankar books and use the name Rebazar Tarzs for maximum effect!
8.) Yeah. It's Harold and Eckankar, but "we" (Dhunami, a spin-off of A.T.O.M, a spin-off of Eckankar) got it right. Paul Twitchell dictated a book and explains the whole deal.
These examples are but a crumb compared to what exists as part of the "blame game". Because, you see, the plagiarism just really doesn't matter a whole lot (according to some people) because lots of people still join Eckankar and people (allegedly) still have experiences with the masters; even (allegedly) before they ever heard of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar.
However, repeatedly and publicly time and time again someone has asked about the plagiarisms and words credited to Rebazar Tarzs or other Eck masters instead. A number of specific QUESTIONS (not statements, mind you) with illustrations for clarity and wanting to ask "What about THAT Rebazar Tarzs? Iow, Does plagiarism make animate a 500+-year-old living master? Etc. Does THIS (see examples) text and copied materials make him real?
Keyword search The Kinpa Legacy and get an extreme example about deflecting blame. Better yet, search for the thread
Kinpa wrote: "You will see those ECK Masters when you die LMAO! And you WILL beg them to help you too!"
and look at all the colorful names besides!
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/EsbSd8gb3S0/pugbgqgxAwAJ
If Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, etc. are really not in the wrong so much, and for making up fictions that some people took ("hook, line and sinker") literally and then started arguing with other people who refused to take the "bait" then there is but one course of action left. Iow, if there has to be blame then there MUST be a target! Find a target and deflect the criticisms to there. Iow detract from the truth, blame other people and then label them the detractors!
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 10:28:47 AM9/9/17
to
On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 6:57:30 AM UTC-5, Etznab wrote:
IMO it makes more sense (in this particular context) to (have to) do something about what already has been done vs. having to do something about what is yet to be done. One has to hear the tone of Harold's voice and the reaction of the audience to really get a feel for the moment and what was actually said. And I am trying to say that it seems to me the talk was about "source manuscripts" for Paul Twitchell's writings, or the Eck writings that had been done on Earth.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/8sfo30cxt7w/2rBkLR9cBQAJ
Now, did I just read something by Doug suggesting the reason for mentioning the astral library was to prove that Paul Twitchell plagiarized because the records there don't lie?
O.K. So if (at least) Paul Twitchell plagiarized but led on that NO it wasn't plagiarism, but it was Rebazar Tarzs dictating to me. (Really? Waving his hands and everything?)
There is the possibility that Paul Twitchell created some pseudo history and pseudo religion. This, IMHO, is the question that needs clarification and the answer needs to be talked about. This newsgroup is a good place to dialogue and discuss the matter.
For starters, there was a chapter in the book Letters to Gail, Vol. III. It was titled: 120. Imagination and History. The date of this letter (about p. 75) was February 29, 1964. On the first page the 3rd paragraph is very insightful with regard to man-made events vs. God-made events.
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 10:32:17 AM9/9/17
to
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/dZOS0fjAoxw/YO-u9EWuBwAJ
Etznab
Sep 9, 2017, 10:35:44 AM9/9/17
to
Questions. Was Paul Twitchell a creator of pseudo events?
Which events?
Was Paul Twitchell a creator of pseudo religion?
How so?
Henosis Sage
Sep 9, 2017, 5:36:05 PM9/9/17
to
As in that old chestnut the "Freudian Slip" ?
Henosis Sage
Sep 9, 2017, 5:56:19 PM9/9/17
to
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B-M0yAR0UPhPQzlkeEVWUFEzZlk
Henosis Sage
Sep 9, 2017, 6:00:40 PM9/9/17
to
Absolutely yes.
Did he share some "useful info, knowledge, and history" along the way.
Yes. The problem is recognising the difference between that which is useful/true/accurate and Twitchell's made up crap and his incompetent Bullshit which makes up at least 98% of eckankar's teachings and the beliefs people have been FED for 50 years now.
Message has been deleted
Etznab
Oct 13, 2017, 8:18:39 PM10/13/17
to
> The point of this is that you can't fool the records in the Astral Library. It was clear there that Paul had borrowed from other writers. That's the point of Harold's story. That's why he was talking about Paul as a Compiler at the beginning of the talk, and that we need to take him down off the pedestal as a god and see that he was a man. Harold called this the death of an ideal. Harold talks about the stages that people go through in accepting a death in the family - rejecting the idea, then anger, then confusion and doubt, then disillusionment, then acceptance - or something like that. All this was because plagiarism is not the way we want to see Paul. That was all in the same talk, concluding with Harold talking about his dream in the Astral Library where he finally saw Paul.
>
>
> Here's how Harold ends his talk:
>
> "I'm doing all this research in a soundproof booth so it doesn't disturb the other people who are doing research. As I look over at a table, I see Paul--busy as usual, researching and writing. He looks at me and says, kind of gruffly, "What's that?"
>
> " 'Source manuscripts, ' I say.
>
> " 'For what? ' he asks.
>
> " 'To show where a lot of the ECK writings on earth came from, ' I reply.
>
> " 'Oh, ' he says. 'Well, we'll have to do something about that someday. '
>
> "Then he picks up his notebook and leaves, heading out into the stacks.
>
> "Yeah, I thought to myself, and I know who is going to have to do something about that someday! "
>
> Here is what David Lane said in his book:
>
> Simply put, Klemp has invented a story to cover-up Twitchell's plagiarism so that Eckankar can still get away with publishing "stolen" materials.
>
> In fact, the point Harold was making was the exact opposite. Harold was breaking the news to ECKists that Paul borrowed and copied. That was the very thing he was studying in his dream.
>
> David Lane challenged me on my interpretation, and we had some long dialogues about it. The whole of Harold's talk makes sense if you see it as I'm explaining. It doesn't make sense if Harold is trying to explain that it wasn't plagiarism after all because Paul got it all from the Astral. Then why would Harold need to clean up a mess?
>
> But the real problem here is simply that Harold never said what David accused him of saying. Harold never even suggests it. It was simply a mistaken interpretation.
>
> David wasn't the only one to make this mistake. I can see why some might draw the wrong conclusion, but since I had firsthand experience with it, I know that the last thing Harold was trying to do was cover something up. Quite the opposite.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Doug Marman.
>
> ***
>
> http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
[...] I worked at the ECK Office first when it was located in Las Vegas. I started there about one year after Darwin became the Master. He was one of the most humble people back then.
>
> "I'm doing all this research in a soundproof booth so it doesn't disturb the other people who are doing research. As I look over at a table, I see Paul--busy as usual, researching and writing. He looks at me and says, kind of gruffly, "What's that?"
>
> " 'Source manuscripts, ' I say.
>
> " 'For what? ' he asks.
>
> " 'To show where a lot of the ECK writings on earth came from, ' I reply.
>
> " 'Oh, ' he says. 'Well, we'll have to do something about that someday. '
>
> "Then he picks up his notebook and leaves, heading out into the stacks.
>
> "Yeah, I thought to myself, and I know who is going to have to do something about that someday! "
>
> Here is what David Lane said in his book:
>
> Simply put, Klemp has invented a story to cover-up Twitchell's plagiarism so that Eckankar can still get away with publishing "stolen" materials.
>
> In fact, the point Harold was making was the exact opposite. Harold was breaking the news to ECKists that Paul borrowed and copied. That was the very thing he was studying in his dream.
>
> David Lane challenged me on my interpretation, and we had some long dialogues about it. The whole of Harold's talk makes sense if you see it as I'm explaining. It doesn't make sense if Harold is trying to explain that it wasn't plagiarism after all because Paul got it all from the Astral. Then why would Harold need to clean up a mess?
>
> But the real problem here is simply that Harold never said what David accused him of saying. Harold never even suggests it. It was simply a mistaken interpretation.
>
> David wasn't the only one to make this mistake. I can see why some might draw the wrong conclusion, but since I had firsthand experience with it, I know that the last thing Harold was trying to do was cover something up. Quite the opposite.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Doug Marman.
>
> ***
>
> http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
"I worked on a number of projects with him and got to know him personally.
"I talk about this in my Internet book. One of the projects I took on was to organize Paul's orginal taped talks, which had been abandoned in a loft there. It was a mess. I listened to everyone of Paul's talks at least a dozen times, as I tried to sort out when and where it took place, and to splice them back together into their original form.
(That would be around 1972 when Doug worked started working at the Eckankar office.)
"[...] Years later, when Harold became the Master, he gave me a chance to go through Paul's library and files, after they have been retrieved from Darwin's home. I learned a lot more about Paul there. [... .]"
(This would be about ten years after, or the early 1980s.)
"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"
*********
"[...] 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. [... .]" - A Few Responses - Doug Marman - February 8th, 2004
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=268&page=168#m264
*********
"Paul had an uncanny knack for depicting the human condition through the writings left by other authors. But he took their efforts a step further. He recast the seed ideas so they fit into a grander, more compelling spiritual framework. He artfully presented the subject of the power of imagination as Soul’s peculiar talent for survival in every universe of creation."
- Excerpt from: Behind the Scenes with Paul Twitchell, Harold Klemp
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/behindscenes.html
Etznab
Oct 13, 2017, 8:22:06 PM10/13/17
to
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/hfDu3l93xxU/s0oDVebTyEkJ
https://web.archive.org/web/20111113090716/http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
"[...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day I told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The Master.
"The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower to into a deep, gravely sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was mimicing the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/z1ks3dcjb4s/LWKpUi3Vv0MJ
40028007-7008-3
Etznab
Oct 13, 2017, 9:11:17 PM10/13/17
to
A question one might ponder is Why did Doug Marman seem to "defend" Eckankar and Paul Twitchell? Other questions might include:
Did Doug try to defend the printing of false biographical information?
Did Doug try to defend plagiarism?
Did Doug try to defend putting plagiarized words into the mouths of Eck masters as if the Eck masters were saying them?
If Doug already had information about these things then why try to "defend", to "apologize" and / or spin them into something else?
Maybe Doug didn't really like David Lane's characterization of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, but that doesn't give Doug a green light to deny the truths that David or others uncovered. Especially if the same truths were ones that Doug already knew about all along.
Although Doug's knowledge of what Paul Twitchell and Eckankar did was in many ways similar to what David Lane knew, I think Doug took the liberty of trying to define what it all meant to him. Even what he thought it should mean to others. Iow, Doug's "Whole Truth" included more than just the truth. It included Doug's own "poetry". Imagine that!
Here in this group and on other discussion boards it seemed that people had a choice. A choice to believe David Lane, or Doug Marman. Then there was Ford Johnson who echoed a lot of David Lane's research and findings and, again, it seemed that people had a choice. Ford Johnson or Doug Marman? It looked as if people were stereotyped according to who they believed IN SPITE OF THE TRUTH! It, the online debates, were successful at detracting from the truth by making the dialogues personal, heated, emotional, mean and hateful. The dialogues were moved away from following the facts to a polarization of prejudices and focus on one of two opposing sources.
So many facts could have carried weight and added to the online debates, but since they were not verified the facts were cast by the wayside as incredible and inadmissible. Eye witness accounts were considered heresy and those in the know remained in the background. The numerous dialogues and the websites that sponsored them faded away. With them went the records and documentation that they accumulated. One side seemed to grow utterly passive while the other side (Doug Marman) carried on a while longer. At this point it might seem that both sides have gone dormant as if the whole affair were swept under the rug and out of public domain. All that remains are but lingering echoes of conversations that once were, but that are fading fast.
It might seem so, at least. However, the dialogues from before yielded a lot of information. David Lane shared a lot, but so did Doug Marman. The contributions
by both, and by Ford Johnson, are not the final word since they have been added to and taken further. Taken much further. The "growing list" of copied material and plagiarisms, the growing list of name changes, of pseudo history & religion have entered the public domain en masse and the amount of people exposed to the information becoming a "critical mass".
One of the factors having contributed to the revelation of facts was undeniable information that not even Eckankar or the Eckankar leadership could deny and / or ignore. More and more information has since been contributed since the time of david Lane, Doug Marman and Ford Johnson. The information is here in the a.r.e. archives and will continue to eclipse the conclusions of the three former writers. Long story short, the books have not all been written. Neither has all the information been revealed.
Trolls are but fodder for the movement to expose pseudo history and religion.
40028007-7008-3
Etznab
Dec 10, 2017, 8:32:41 PM12/10/17
to
"[...] as chance or fate would have it Harold told me about the talk he was going to give, what he was going to try to explain and why. In other words, he told me his intentions. I then explained where he was coming from, based on what he told me. [... .]"
https://web.archive.org/web/20111113085701/http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=345&page=161#m345
0 new messages