Breaking free of cult brainwashing, Part I
Sharo...@myremarq.com
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> iPRONO wrote in message <38C6EE...@subgenius.com>...
>
> >Bliss wrote:
> >>
> >> x-no-archive:yes
> >>
> >> >A map can't transport you to where you are going. It's a scam, pure
> >> >and simple, but people are buying into it by the 100's of 1000's each
> >> >year all over the world.
> >>
> >> I agree that Eckankar is a map to God, but in your analogy, you need a
> >> vehicle, such as a car, to transport you. The map merely points the
> >> way without taking
> you
> >> anywhere.
> >
> >My point exactly. Calling a map a "scam" because it isn't a car is like
> >calling Eckankar a "scam" because it doesn't do the work for you.
>
> I did not call Eckankar a scam in the paragraph you originally replied
> to.
>
> This is the claim I made:
>
> > But the master cannot "connect" you to what you're already connected
> > to. It's a scam, pure and simple, but people are buying into it by the
> > 100's of 1000's each year all over the world.
>
> I was referring to a master (not Eckankar) claiming that you need him to
> connect you to Spirit/Light and Sound/God/whatever. This claim is what I
> think is a scam, not the whole of Eckankar, and not the whole of the
> other paths that make this claim, which includes Sant Mat- a path I
> otherwise respect and admire. Like most things in this world, most
> spiritual paths are not all good, nor are they all bad.
>
> I also said that Eckankar WAS a map to God, but you were apparently so
> ticked off that you continued to accuse me of calling Eckankar a scam.
> How could Eckankar be a scam and a map to God at the same time?
>
> I thought the "map to God" thing was kind of a nice thing to say, but
> apparently detractors are not eligible for brownie points on ARE no
> matter what. Damn. <g>.
>
> In Eckankar, I was told that the Mahanta/Living Eck Master (Harold Klemp)
> was needed to connect me to the Light and Sound. But I CONNECTED TO
> INNER LIGHT MYSELF WITH A SIMPLE MANTRA years earlier. I also learned a
> sound technique through my study of yoga, and heard the sound of a
> musical instrument. But what I'm hearing from a lot of masters is that
> this is not possible without their help.
>
> From my own personal experience, therefore, I know that this claim is
> false no matter which master makes it.
>
I totally agree with you, Bliss. I "connected" myself, too,
before eckankar. I wasn't doing anything special...not that
I knew of, that is. I had awesome booming & actually very
frightening experiences with the Light & Sound, experiences
in full consciousness (not those questionable dream experiences)
and I saw and heard incredible things...and there were other
things, a sort of "being" and "knowing" beyond words...
Unfortunately, one of the first explanations I read were the
cult books, and, combined with that deceitful dream with
Klemp, I was conned into believing the cultic lies. In the
later years, as I explored other religions & teachings, I
found what I was looking for all over the place, but had been
semi-brainwashed into believing it was all the cult's "eck."
As Krishnamurti said,
"Nobody, *nobody* can teach you what meditation is, however
long-bearded the gentleman may be, or whatever strange
garments he may wear. Find out for yourself and stand by
what you find out for yourself, and do not depend on
anybody."
Of course, we *know* what the eckists say, and how they've
been taught to believe lies, and they think they're free...
But...the way they are here, and often in the outside world,
it's quite clear that what they have is a false connection,
and false experiences. If they had the least bit of love
and truth in their hearts, well...we wouldn't see what we
see here every day. There would be a consistency in their
words and their actions...and the org itself wouldn't be
so manipulative, deceptive, and slimy...so fearful and
almost paranoid in its mind-set...
Well, I gotta run!! Have a nice day!!
Hugs,
Sharon
--
http://members.delphi.com/sharon2000
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet for the Web
Sharo...@myremarq.com
> Bliss wrote:
>
> >
> > I thought the "map to God" thing was kind of a nice thing to say,
>
>
Well, you can buy a map for $5 at the mini-mart if
you're in a hurry, maybe lazy and with more money
than brains...
Or you can pick up a free map at a rest area, or many
other places....
> > but apparently
> > detractors are not eligible for brownie points on ARE no matter what.
> > Damn. <g>.
>
> Paul this is a fellow detractor criticizing you, not an Eckists.
So, Rich...how's the phone bill?
What's next? Letter bombs?
Have you talked MN into more lawsuits?
Gotta defend THE TRUTH against us infidels, don't
you?
"Therefore, as you can readily see, my greatest task is not to gather
disciples for ECK, but to create a corps of 'true believers.' This corps
must convince itself that it's the only moral position in the universe.
Their moral absolution gives them the right to dissolve what they judge to
be amoral according to the conditions of the world an its higher spheres.
The breaking up of the old traditional religions and reestablishing of the
rightful beliefs under the banner of ECK is the way of the right [...]
Indeed such attitudes are not only felt to be right, but it's an
obligation to those who belong to the ECK Truth Corps. This truth corps is
often known as "the Mahanta's children." PT, Satsang III, L. 2 (secret
discourse)
Rich
>
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> >> > but apparently
> >> > detractors are not eligible for brownie points on ARE no matter what.
> >> > Damn. <g>.
> >>
>
> Rich wrote:
>
> >> Paul this is a fellow detractor criticizing you, not an Eckists.
>
You must have missed Radical, JT and several others.
> but I
> must admit that once somebody lights into me, I just skim over the rest of the
> post, and my first impression was- "Eckist kicking my butt".
>
> Is iPRONO Benji, like I thought?
The 'subgenius' junk was something he often touted and the post came
from teleport.com that he has used for years...
> Anyway, a map still doesn't get you anywhere without the car, and in the first
> round of the debate, iPRONO said it could. His/her second comeback was a
> desperate ploy that I glossed over the first time because I was trying to be
> conciliatory to what I thought was an Eckist.
>
> But I'm on a mission, so damn the torpedoes, no matter who's firing them!
A "mission huh?
> Besides, I'm always right, just like you. <g>.
As I have written to you numerous times(perhaps you skimmed over them?:)
that I try to not view things as right/wrong or good/bad.
> It doesn't matter that this is
> impossible, because the laws that govern the rest of the universe don't apply
> here. If they did, the basic argument would have been over several years ago.
>
> Wishing you'd defect to our side, but luv ya anyway,
Thanks Paul. This is the bit of warmth that I see peeking out of your
rhetoric every once in a while, that is so sadly lacking from the other
detractors. But again, I don't see it so much as 'sides' as just
different POV's and SOC's. I disagree with some Eckist's opinions just
as I see many of the detractors points as valid criticisms that I agree
with.
--
o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_ /____|___\_
(___________/
Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sharo...@myremarq.com
> > This truth corps is
> >often known as "the Mahanta's children." PT, Satsang III, L. 2
> >(secret discourse)
> >
> >
>
> here. But, I truly don't believe there are many thinking people who will
> not come to realize that what you have written and/or copied here is done
> so with malace.
No, Judy, it's not done with malice. Truly thinking people
are capable of looking at the so-called "teachings" as a
whole and making up their own minds. Truly thinking people
appreciate seeing the things that Klemp has instructed
eckmissionaries to de-emphasize.
Klemp in The Living Word, Book 2: "The entire ECK spiritual heirarchy is
working
on the ECK missions project."
"The truth about ECK Initiates is that some ar good Vahanas, or
missionaries, and some are not. (...) The first ECKist, the unsuccessful
one, uses old techniques from ten and twenty years ago. He or she
frightens people. (...) Such topics put new people off today. It's OK to
mention them---they are, after all, a part of the ECK teachings-- but why
dwell on them?
"...the successful one, shows a very different pattern. He or she is
willing to try new ways of reaching the millions of willing Souls, and
works closely with the ECK initiates at the Eckankar Spiritual Center.
This approach works. Its success lies in having the focus on the spiritual
needs of the seeker instead of what a great teaching *we* represent."
(pages 200-201)
In that, those of us who have not gotten to the point
> where we are ready for this particular discourse recognize, fairly
> quickly, that you cannot know the whole point to something like this
> without having read the whole discourse, rather than just one little
> paragraph. The point within is lost without knowing what came before and
> after.
>
Judy, the discourses are no different from any of the
eckbooks. In fact...Twitch even anticipated members
noticing the discourse material was straight from the
eckbooks, which is why he wrote a lot about how even
though it appeared that way, they had an exceptionally
high vibration and there was a lot of "inner" stuff that
wasn't readily apparent. That's crap!
Twitch said the eckdiscourses were on a much higher level
than the ordinary "lessons" of all those "lower" paths.
Nothing is lost, believe me.
> On top of that, the discourses are a matter of study. Reading this is
> like reading algebra before you learn to add and subtract. They go in
> succession and deliver a heartfelt point within.
>
Uh, Judy...let me remind you, I was an eckist for almost
15 years. And I *know* the discourses are to be studied,
and I did that. When the discourse arrives, you read the
whole thing. Contemplate on it. Take it to the inner,
etc. Then, every night, (or whenever, I did it at bedtime)
you read a paragraph or so, contemplate on it, do the
recommended spiritual exercise, etc.
> There's no one who is associated with Eckankar, who has studied any of
> the discourses thus far who would be caught up in your little game.
>
Oh...by the way, perhaps you should check with the eckclergy
here. I believe both Ken and Rich have said they don't really
read and/or study them. And I'm pretty sure it was Ken who
said he doesn't go to Satsang, although I can show plenty of
quotes where Harold (and Twitch) say you don't get much
spiritual growth without them.
There are plenty of people who studied ALL the discourses who
recognize them for exactly what they are -- nothing!
You know, I'd say a very high percentage of former eckists I
hear from leave when they're 5ths or 6ths.
It's not a game, Judy. It's consumer education.
> I'm sorry you have felt so much hurt, Sharon,
Why do you think I'm hurt, Judy? I know how to roll with the
punches...I knew that long before the cult. It's not a big
deal, really.
You seem to be a bit stuck on the lies the cult tells you
to explain members who leave. I assure you, anything you
read in the eckbooks about we who leave is quite untrue.
but you really need to find
> somewhere else to put your energy.
Really? What makes you say that? How do you know where my
energy is directed, and what I do with my time? And what
gives you the right to comment on it?
I suggest you study your "teachings" a bit longer, Judy.
Oh...here's one for you: "Cease to cherish your opinions."
That's either from Twitch, or "dictated" to him! <ggg>
You said you were happy with
> Catholicism.....I'm sure they would just love to have you. Please feel
> free to visit:
>
> han.soc.religion.chrisianity.catholic (all)
I'm free to visit, and post, wherever I choose.
I choose alt.religion.eckankar.
Sharo...@myremarq.com
> In article <20000311151101...@ng-fm1.aol.com>,
> gal...@aol.com (Galuuk) wrote:
> > Sharon writes on how to study the Eck discourses....
>
> > Sharon, you forgot about the part where you light up your joint and
> take some
> > deep hits. I forget, was that before you read??...while you're
> > reading??....or after you're done??..........or all three???
> >
> > Or did you forget that sequence too???
> >
> > Joey
>
> The Mahdis shall not use alcohol, tobacco, drugs, gamble or be
> gluttonous in any way.
>
Well, Hi Dave!! How are you doing? How's Maria?
And Panther?
Irrelevant...by the way, I see Joey is being his usual
sweet self. I wasn't a Mahdis....I didn't use drugs
when I was an eckist. I smoked. I was working hard
on it. Discussed it with several HIs during my eckyears,
took it on the inner a lot...
You wanna know something? I don't think it's that
important.
Anyway...hope you're doing well on your chosen path,
perhaps you can somehow make up for your past
transgressions and maybe they'll actually forgive you
for it.
So...why don't you join the party, and tell everyone
what a bad & toxic eckist I was?
Seeing stuff like that is what got me out of the cult.
Makes me think of something several black friends have
told me. They don't have a problem with open hatred,
they're used to it. They realize it comes from
ignorant people who don't know any better, or from
people who are just plain rotten inside.
It's the ones who act nice to your face who are the
ones you have to watch out for.
I've learned not to trust anyone or anything that wears
the ecklabel.
Windy
>
> Rich wrote:
> >
> > Jackie wrote:
> >
> > > I believe we, Souls, are here on this physical plane and all other
> > > planes below the Soul plane, to get experience. If I was perfect, I
> > > wouldn't be here. So now I don't put myself down if I don't live
> > > constantly by these laws. When I don't, I am grateful that I can learn
> > > more about this area I need work on. Personally, I don't believe these
> > > laws are just for Mahdis. The human consciousness is within all human
> > > beings and so is God consciousness.
> >
> > From the other end of the spectrum to the passions of the mind, there
> > are these to work towards. And like you said about the laws Jackie, the
> > karma for these actions come equality as quick.;-)
> >
> > • The Five Virtues •
> >
> > 1. "Tolerance is giving others space to have their experiences with
> > divine understanding and love. Being patient with a family member, being
> > kind when someone makes a mistake, and forgiving someone who has hurt
> > you are examples of tolerance. It is the opposite of anger because it
> > builds bridges to others, while anger tears them down."
> >
> > 2. "Contentment is the practice of happiness on a daily basis. It is the
> > attitude of finding the good things in your life right now and being
> > truly grateful for them. Contentment is the key to happiness. When you
> > are content, you can always find something to be happy about."
> >
> > 3. "Humility is understand God's great love for Soul and wanting to
> > return that love in some way, no matter how small. Humility is not
> > feeling lowly or unworthy. In fact, it is just the opposite. Humility
> > comes from the being confident in yourself as a vehicle for the ECK
> > (Spirit). One way to develop humility is to do something every day as a
> > service to God."
> >
> > 4. "Discrimination means making choices which are best for Soul's growth
> > and avoiding what will hold Soul back. Discrimination includes listening
> > to the ECK (Spirit) to show us the right action to take, like when you
> > speak and when to keep silent, whom to choose as friends, and what
> > direction to go when you come to a crossroads in your life. To develop
> > greater discrimination, start by asking yourself, Is it true, necessary,
> > and kind?"
> >
> > 5. "Detachment is the ability to watch life from the viewpoint of Soul,
> > no matter what is going on in our lives. In other words, it is our
> > ability to be happy, to give and receive love, and to be creative,
> > whether things are pleasant or unpleasant, easy or difficult."
> >
> > (from The ECK Tweenie 3)
> >
> > --
> > o
> > |
> > ~/|
> > _/ |\
> > / | \
> > -/ | \
> > _ /____|___\_
> > (___________/
> > Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> my wall next to the computer. It's very easy to recognize and remember
> the passions, but the virtues are wonderful to stride for every day.
>
> Here is an addition to your list above. The opposites of the virtues of
> the mind are the passions of the mind:
>
> 1. Tolerance vs Anger
> 2. Contentment vs Greed
> 3. Humility vs Vanity
> 4. Discrimination vs Lust
> 5. Detachment vs Attachment
>
> --
> With love, Jackie
>
> An Introductory Welcome to ECKANKAR
>
> ECKANKAR Main Web Site:
> http://www.eckankar.org
>
> ECKANKAR Table of Content:
> http://www.eckankar.org/content.html
>
> ECKANKAR, Ancient Wisdom for Today:
> http://www.eckankar.org/freeBook.html
Tolerance vs Anger doesn't seem like the opposite, though. You could
be intolerant but not angry about it, couldn't you?
Also, the discrimination vs Lust doesn't quite fit.
Wouldn't lust be similar to greed? Such as to lust after something?
Also, I have a problem with the attachment and detachment issue. Most
detractors believe that to present yourself as detached you have to be
uncaring. Would you be able to define some of these terms. It might help
to clarify for myself and others just what the proper interpretation is,
especially detachment. I remember last year David Barnes pointed out
that some Eckists he knew were totally misinterpreting what Harold meant
by remaining detached. To read his writings it is obvious that he wants
Eckists to help one another and others as well.
A good example of this to the extreme was when David mentioned a
scenario in which an Eckist refused to call 911 or something similar
because they thought this would gain them karma. This sort of thing
could really cause big problems if people were to take it literally and
sit back and become spectators in a tragic moment that required them to
act.
Ken
<Sharo...@myremarq.com> wrote ...
:
: Makes me think of something several black friends have
: told me. They don't have a problem with open hatred,
: they're used to it. They realize it comes from
: ignorant people who don't know any better, or from
: people who are just plain rotten inside.
:
: It's the ones who act nice to your face who are the
: ones you have to watch out for.
So you're comparing people who choose to be Eckists and study
spirituality to racist bigots? Sure Shazz.
:
: I've learned not to trust anyone or anything that wears
: the ecklabel.
"Ecklabel?"
Whatever, Sharon.
Ken
Ken
<Sharo...@myremarq.com> wrote ...
:
<snips>
:
: > On top of that, the discourses are a matter of study. Reading this is
: > like reading algebra before you learn to add and subtract. They go in
: > succession and deliver a heartfelt point within.
: >
:
:
: Uh, Judy...let me remind you, I was an eckist for almost
: 15 years. And I *know* the discourses are to be studied,
: and I did that. When the discourse arrives, you read the
: whole thing. Contemplate on it. Take it to the inner,
: etc. Then, every night, (or whenever, I did it at bedtime)
: you read a paragraph or so, contemplate on it, do the
: recommended spiritual exercise, etc.
You said right here on a.r.e. that you very rarely did the formal spiritual
exercises. You said that you couldn't hardly sit still for that long. Which
is it? Were you fibbing then or now? Or did you just "forget"?
:
:
:
: > There's no one who is associated with Eckankar, who has studied any of
: > the discourses thus far who would be caught up in your little game.
: >
:
:
: Oh...by the way, perhaps you should check with the eckclergy
: here. I believe both Ken and Rich have said they don't really
: read and/or study them.
I'm not an Eck clergy. If you paid attention, you'd know that.
: And I'm pretty sure it was Ken who
: said he doesn't go to Satsang,
I try to follow my inner spiritual guidance as much as possible. I've
attended plenty of Satsangs in the past, and taken time away from them
too. Right now I'm not attending one. What's your point?
: although I can show plenty of
: quotes where Harold (and Twitch) say you don't get much
: spiritual growth without them.
I doubt it that Paul or Harold ever said that.
: There are plenty of people who studied ALL the discourses who
: recognize them for exactly what they are -- nothing!
:
: You know, I'd say a very high percentage of former eckists I
: hear from leave when they're 5ths or 6ths.
:
: It's not a game, Judy. It's consumer education.
Just like Ralph Nader, right? Saving the world from a crisis he created
out of thin air in order to fuel his own career. Now there's a guy who
oughta go out and get a real job.
Ken
Jackie
>
> Tolerance vs Anger doesn't seem like the opposite, though. You could
> be intolerant but not angry about it, couldn't you?
> Also, the discrimination vs Lust doesn't quite fit.
> Wouldn't lust be similar to greed? Such as to lust after something?
> Also, I have a problem with the attachment and detachment issue. Most
> detractors believe that to present yourself as detached you have to be
> uncaring. Would you be able to define some of these terms. It might help
> to clarify for myself and others just what the proper interpretation is,
> especially detachment.
Ok, I'll give it a try. IMO, there are no clear, cut answers. These
virtues can mix with other passions. This is what the Tweenie 3
discourse says. BTW, this book was available to the public, so that's
why I'm posting it here. The passion follows the virtue below.
> > > • The Five Virtues •
> > >
> > > 1. "Tolerance is giving others space to have their experiences with
> > > divine understanding and love. Being patient with a family member, being
> > > kind when someone makes a mistake, and forgiving someone who has hurt
> > > you are examples of tolerance. It is the opposite of anger because it
> > > builds bridges to others, while anger tears them down."
"Anger is a very destructive energy. It can consume us. Fighting,
swearing, name-calling, gossip, criticism, and impatience are just a few
common forms of anger. Anger's destructiveness cuts Soul off from the
life-giving flow of the ECK. Just as a plant stops growing and begins to
shrivel when it is cut off from water, Soul stops growing when It is cut
off from the flow of the ECK. Anger breaks down our connection with the
ECK and leaves us feeling afraid and alone."
> > >
> > > 2. "Contentment is the practice of happiness on a daily basis. It is the
> > > attitude of finding the good things in your life right now and being
> > > truly grateful for them. Contentment is the key to happiness. When you
> > > are content, you can always find something to be happy about."
"Greed is the excessive desire to possess things. It is not necessarily
the wanting that makes greed, but the fact that the person who is greedy
never feels that he has enough. Greed can be for money, friends, power,
toys, love, or even spiritual growth. The greedy person is someone who
is dissatisfied with himself, so he always thinks that he is missing
something."
> > >
> > > 3. "Humility is understand God's great love for Soul and wanting to
> > > return that love in some way, no matter how small. Humility is not
> > > feeling lowly or unworthy. In fact, it is just the opposite. Humility
> > > comes from the being confident in yourself as a vehicle for the ECK
> > > (Spirit). One way to develop humility is to do something every day as a
> > > service to God."
"Vanity is putting too much attention on the little self. As a result, a
vain person is very self-conscious. In other words, he thinks a lot
about himself and also about what others might think of him. All this
attention on the little self makes a person feel either superior or
inferior, both signs of vanity. Shyness, boastfulness, the need to
approval, and self-criticism are some of the many ways of feeling
superior or inferior."
> > >
> > > 4. "Discrimination means making choices which are best for Soul's growth
> > > and avoiding what will hold Soul back. Discrimination includes listening
> > > to the ECK (Spirit) to show us the right action to take, like when you
> > > speak and when to keep silent, whom to choose as friends, and what
> > > direction to go when you come to a crossroads in your life. To develop
> > > greater discrimination, start by asking yourself, Is it true, necessary,
> > > and kind?"
"Lust is an exaggerated craving for any sensation. It is generally used
to describe adult passions for sex, drugs, or alcohol. But lust can also
be directed to food, especially when people eat primarily to experience
the taste rather than to feed the physical body, which is the true
purpose for eating. Lust makes people unhappy unless they are having the
sensation they enjoy at that moment."
> > >
> > > 5. "Detachment is the ability to watch life from the viewpoint of Soul,
> > > no matter what is going on in our lives. In other words, it is our
> > > ability to be happy, to give and receive love, and to be creative,
> > > whether things are pleasant or unpleasant, easy or difficult."
"Attachment is not being able to let go of the people, things, feelings,
ideas, and experiences of our human lives. It is like an actor who
believes so much in his role that he forgets he is in a movie. In the
same way, Soul can forget that It is here to learn something and return
to God. Through fixing our attention on any kind of experience, pleasant
or unpleasant, we can get stuck in it."
> > >
> > > (from The ECK Tweenie 3)
>Windy wrote:
> I remember last year David Barnes pointed out
> that some Eckists he knew were totally misinterpreting what Harold meant
> by remaining detached. To read his writings it is obvious that he wants
> Eckists to help one another and others as well.
I think it is very possible for ECKists/Non-ECKists to misinterpret Sri
Harold's words! I don't believe he ever told us to become detached from
life.
> A good example of this to the extreme was when David mentioned a
> scenario in which an Eckist refused to call 911 or something similar
> because they thought this would gain them karma. This sort of thing
> could really cause big problems if people were to take it literally and
> sit back and become spectators in a tragic moment that required them to
> act.
I remember this example. I didn't understand that choice of action,
myself. People make choices that don't always make sense to me. Fear is
an underlining reason for many peoples actions (or lack of action). This
is why it is SO important for people to take the spiritual principles
into contemplation. Coming from the higher self (Soul) will result in
the "right" action. Coming from the little self (or ego) can get us into
trouble. That's my take on it anyway.
Sharo...@myremarq.com
> >
> > Here is an addition to your list above. The opposites of the virtues of
> > the mind are the passions of the mind:
> >
> > 1. Tolerance vs Anger
> > 2. Contentment vs Greed
> > 3. Humility vs Vanity
> > 4. Discrimination vs Lust
> > 5. Detachment vs Attachment
> >
> > --
> Tolerance vs Anger doesn't seem like the opposite, though. You could
> be intolerant but not angry about it, couldn't you?
Certainly, although it's difficult for eckists! <GG>
One can be intolerant of lies and deceit and speak out against
it, while recognizing that the liars and deceivers are simply
caught in the trap of their own intolerant blindness, and
attachment to false beliefs, and one can still have compassion
for them.
> Also, the discrimination vs Lust doesn't quite fit.
Fits quite well, actually. Lust doesn't necessarily mean
sexual lust. It can be lust for anything...for example, the
need to remain firmly attached to one's beliefs to the point
where one is unwilling to admit the possibility that there's
something wrong, in order to boost their shaky self-esteem
that has been unrealistically inflated by the elitist
"teachings" of eckankar.
When you lust for the false promises of the cult, you lose your
ability to discriminate.
An example of this is when a detractor posts a spiritual story,
and you fail to recognize the truth in it because it doesn't
wear the ecklabel. Even though it turns out later that the
story was taken from a twitchbook.
Hey...even though you nuked yourself, I can still find that one
in the archives, because I believe I responded to it and your
insult was probably included!
> Wouldn't lust be similar to greed? Such as to lust after something?
Right. Twitch, for example. Greedy little bugger, he was.
> Also, I have a problem with the attachment and detachment issue. Most
> detractors believe that to present yourself as detached you have to be
> uncaring.
Windy, you're not at all qualified to speak about what
detractors believe. We, on the other hand, were once
eckists, and can therefore speak about what that means.
Being detached means in your heart, you are always at
peace, no matter what goes on around you.
Being detached gives one the ability to care without
limitations.
Hey...an example of non-detachment is when you're told a lie
about someone's mental condition in a group like the
EckGestapo, and when this person makes a negative statement
about the cult, you become angry and immediately strike out
with this piece of gossip, showing a blind hatred towards
someone who believes differently than you do, and a fanatical
determination to disallow someone a different opinion by
whatever tactics you choose, even if that hurts someone.
You weren't detached, and you definitely weren't very caring.
Would you be able to define some of these terms. It might help
> to clarify for myself and others just what the proper interpretation is,
> especially detachment. I remember last year David Barnes pointed out
> that some Eckists he knew were totally misinterpreting what Harold meant
> by remaining detached. To read his writings it is obvious that he wants
> Eckists to help one another and others as well.
Hmmmm....and Dave (posting as Ron or Rod McKernan)
didn't get much detachment or anything from you eckists,
did he? He got attacked pretty badly, I recall.
You didn't think he was trying to be helpful. You and
the rest of the cult members here were pretty nasty.
> A good example of this to the extreme was when David mentioned a
> scenario in which an Eckist refused to call 911 or something similar
> because they thought this would gain them karma. This sort of thing
> could really cause big problems if people were to take it literally and
> sit back and become spectators in a tragic moment that required them to
> act.
A better example is the way your cult treats members who
leave. Or, the way the cult has brainwashed members into
thinking that going around hu-ing is going to make the
world a better place, instead of actually *doing* something
positive.
For example, in my almost 15 years as a cult member, there
was plenty of stuff about doing things that would "spread
the word" and get people interested in joining the cult...
for example, getting eckgroups to adopt portions of highway
for cleanup so that the word "ECKANKAR" would be seen on
those little signs on the side of the road.
Twitch, of course, started it with "Letters to a Chela".
Twitch, and Harold, have no use for any kind of "good deeds"
simply for the sake of opening one's heart and sharing the
love inside with others. The cult equates love with
getting new members, and in doing this, has twisted and
perverted the natural love in people's hearts for its own
devious ends and personal benefit.
"It is an axiom of ECK that whosoever tries to serve humanity will be a
failure....Few realize that the man who says his great desire is
to serve mankind, is speaking from the level of the Kal (Satanic)
forces. It is one of Kal Niranjan's greatest traps to make one feel
he is serving his fellow man. All those who heal the physical and
mental aspects of man who seek after peace for mankind are deceived
that this is God's design and will."
The Wisdom of ECK, pg. 69 Paul Twitchell.
So, Mother Teresa was a failure? She spoke from the
level of the Kal?
Have a nice week, Rita!
Windy
>
> Windy wrote:
> >
> > Tolerance vs Anger doesn't seem like the opposite, though. You could
> > be intolerant but not angry about it, couldn't you?
> > Also, the discrimination vs Lust doesn't quite fit.
> > Wouldn't lust be similar to greed? Such as to lust after something?
> > Also, I have a problem with the attachment and detachment issue. Most
> > detractors believe that to present yourself as detached you have to be
> > uncaring. Would you be able to define some of these terms. It might help
> > to clarify for myself and others just what the proper interpretation is,
> > especially detachment.
>
> Ok, I'll give it a try. IMO, there are no clear, cut answers. These
> virtues can mix with other passions. This is what the Tweenie 3
> discourse says. BTW, this book was available to the public, so that's
> why I'm posting it here. The passion follows the virtue below.
>
> swearing, name-calling, gossip, criticism, and impatience are just a few
> common forms of anger. Anger's destructiveness cuts Soul off from the
> life-giving flow of the ECK. Just as a plant stops growing and begins to
> shrivel when it is cut off from water, Soul stops growing when It is cut
> off from the flow of the ECK. Anger breaks down our connection with the
> ECK and leaves us feeling afraid and alone."
>
was in the back seat of the car with out dog, Tinker. He did something
that made Tinker growls and my son asked "Shouldn't Tinker have a temper
shot?" He had heard us speaking of distemper shots and thought it meant
to control his temper!
Anyway, I would discribe what is referred to as anger as bitterness.
You can have a bitterness toward life which would not necessarily be
anger, but it would set you up to be intolerant of others. Semantics, I
suppose.
> > > > 2. "Contentment is the practice of happiness on a daily basis. It is the
> > > > attitude of finding the good things in your life right now and being
> > > > truly grateful for them. Contentment is the key to happiness. When you
> > > > are content, you can always find something to be happy about."
>
> "Greed is the excessive desire to possess things. It is not necessarily
> the wanting that makes greed, but the fact that the person who is greedy
> never feels that he has enough. Greed can be for money, friends, power,
> toys, love, or even spiritual growth. The greedy person is someone who
> is dissatisfied with himself, so he always thinks that he is missing
> something."
Ok, this definition makes sense to me. Words are sometimes
misinterpretted in their meaning and need further difining by examples.
> "Lust is an exaggerated craving for any sensation. It is generally used to describe adult passions for sex, drugs, or alcohol. But lust can also
> be directed to food, especially when people eat primarily to experience
> the taste rather than to feed the physical body, which is the true
> purpose for eating. Lust makes people unhappy unless they are having the
> sensation they enjoy at that moment."
>
Now I guess I must confess to being lustful since I rarely would eat
something that didn't taste good just to satisfy a hunger. To me food
seems to do a lot more than nourish the body. If I eat something that
just fills me up, such as a piece of bread, I feel gypped. I want to
experience the texture and taste to truly feel I have eaten. Now I am
not saying I am gluttonous, just want to enjoy what I put into my mouth
a lot more than being nourished ;-)
> >Windy wrote:
> > I remember last year David Barnes pointed out
> > that some Eckists he knew were totally misinterpreting what Harold meant
> > by remaining detached. To read his writings it is obvious that he wants
> > Eckists to help one another and others as well.
>
> I think it is very possible for ECKists/Non-ECKists to misinterpret Sri
> Harold's words! I don't believe he ever told us to become detached from
> life.
>
> > A good example of this to the extreme was when David mentioned a
> > scenario in which an Eckist refused to call 911 or something similar
> > because they thought this would gain them karma. This sort of thing
> > could really cause big problems if people were to take it literally and
> > sit back and become spectators in a tragic moment that required them to
> > act.
>
> I remember this example. I didn't understand that choice of action,
> myself. People make choices that don't always make sense to me. Fear is
> an underlining reason for many peoples actions (or lack of action). This
> is why it is SO important for people to take the spiritual principles
> into contemplation. Coming from the higher self (Soul) will result in
> the "right" action. Coming from the little self (or ego) can get us into
> trouble. That's my take on it anyway.
>
> With love, Jackie
>
Thanks for the feedback, Jackie.
Are has some good posts and points and that is probably one of the
reasons that I keep coming here.
Windy
Windy
>
> <Sharo...@myremarq.com> wrote ...
> :
> : It's the ones who act nice to your face who are the
> : ones you have to watch out for.
>
> So you're comparing people who choose to be Eckists and study
> spirituality to racist bigots? Sure Shazz.
>
> :
> : I've learned not to trust anyone or anything that wears
> : the ecklabel.
>
> "Ecklabel?"
>
> Whatever, Sharon.
>
> Ken
Well since Sharon says the Eckists are not nice to her face, then I
guess we are considered trustworthy by her measurement. Like you said,
whatevah!
Jackie
> > > Tolerance vs Anger doesn't seem like the opposite, though. You could
> > > be intolerant but not angry about it, couldn't you?
> > > Also, the discrimination vs Lust doesn't quite fit.
> > > Wouldn't lust be similar to greed? Such as to lust after something?
> > > Also, I have a problem with the attachment and detachment issue. Most
> > > detractors believe that to present yourself as detached you have to be
> > > uncaring. Would you be able to define some of these terms. It might help
> > > to clarify for myself and others just what the proper interpretation is,
> > > especially detachment.
> >
> > Ok, I'll give it a try. IMO, there are no clear, cut answers. These
> > virtues can mix with other passions. This is what the Tweenie 3
> > discourse says. BTW, this book was available to the public, so that's
> > why I'm posting it here. The passion follows the virtue below.
> >
>
> > "Anger is a very destructive energy. It can consume us. Fighting,
> > swearing, name-calling, gossip, criticism, and impatience are just a few
> > common forms of anger. Anger's destructiveness cuts Soul off from the
> > life-giving flow of the ECK. Just as a plant stops growing and begins to
> > shrivel when it is cut off from water, Soul stops growing when It is cut
> > off from the flow of the ECK. Anger breaks down our connection with the
> > ECK and leaves us feeling afraid and alone."
> >
> I always see anger as a temper outburst. When my son was very small he
> was in the back seat of the car with out dog, Tinker. He did something
> that made Tinker growls and my son asked "Shouldn't Tinker have a temper
> shot?" He had heard us speaking of distemper shots and thought it meant
> to control his temper!
> Anyway, I would discribe what is referred to as anger as bitterness.
> You can have a bitterness toward life which would not necessarily be
> anger, but it would set you up to be intolerant of others. Semantics, I
> suppose.
Anger can take on many "faces". Are we willing to face our anger
head-on? Experience is a great teacher to help us work through our
anger. I also like to ask for the help of my Inner Master, the Mahanta,
when I do my contemplations. I don't always remember while I'm enmeshed
in my anguish. Sometimes I have to be reminded.
>Jackie wrote:
> > > > > 2. "Contentment is the practice of happiness on a daily basis. It is the
> > > > > attitude of finding the good things in your life right now and being
> > > > > truly grateful for them. Contentment is the key to happiness. When you
> > > > > are content, you can always find something to be happy about."
> >
> > "Greed is the excessive desire to possess things. It is not necessarily
> > the wanting that makes greed, but the fact that the person who is greedy
> > never feels that he has enough. Greed can be for money, friends, power,
> > toys, love, or even spiritual growth. The greedy person is someone who
> > is dissatisfied with himself, so he always thinks that he is missing
> > something."
>
>Windy wrote:
> Ok, this definition makes sense to me. Words are sometimes
> misinterpretted in their meaning and need further difining by examples.
I also think each of these passions and virtues can be intertwine.
>Jackie wrote:
> > "Lust is an exaggerated craving for any sensation. It is generally used
> > to describe adult passions for sex, drugs, or alcohol. But lust can also
> > be directed to food, especially when people eat primarily to experience
> > the taste rather than to feed the physical body, which is the true
> > purpose for eating. Lust makes people unhappy unless they are having the
> > sensation they enjoy at that moment."
> >
>Windy wrote:
> Now I guess I must confess to being lustful since I rarely would eat
> something that didn't taste good just to satisfy a hunger. To me food
> seems to do a lot more than nourish the body. If I eat something that
> just fills me up, such as a piece of bread, I feel gypped. I want to
> experience the texture and taste to truly feel I have eaten. Now I am
> not saying I am gluttonous, just want to enjoy what I put into my mouth
> a lot more than being nourished ;-)
>
Lust over food is a common experience. We all have to eat to survive but
overdoing it becomes an act of lust. Any act that I perform that
becomes obsessive, is an act of lust for me. To get beyond this lust, I
find I need to become more balanced.
> Thanks for the feedback, Jackie.
> Are has some good posts and points and that is probably one of the
> reasons that I keep coming here.
> Windy
I find it refreshing to communicate and learn from others. Thanks.
--
With love, Jackie
Lucy
> > > swearing, name-calling, gossip, criticism, and impatience are just a
few
> > > common forms of anger. Anger's destructiveness cuts Soul off from the
> > > life-giving flow of the ECK. Just as a plant stops growing and begins
to
> > > shrivel when it is cut off from water, Soul stops growing when It is
cut
> > > off from the flow of the ECK. Anger breaks down our connection with
the
> > > ECK and leaves us feeling afraid and alone."
> > >
mortal and I still get very angry. I have found that my anger is usually a
signal that something is wrong or out of balance - either in myself or my
world. For example, for years I lived with and loved someone who talked a
good spiritual life. For a while, our time together was very full of spirit
and after the years I had spent alone and lonely, it was very healing.
Then we moved in together. Slowly, impreceptibly, things between us
changed. It seemed that there were times when we could not be together
without arguing. My anger burned - I would remember the teachings and back
off. I would ask forgiveness, grudgingly receive it and we would move on.
But these moments of anger kept coming until it seemed we could not even be
together in the same space. I started to listen to that anger - try to
understand it's source. One day, it hit me - the only time I could be with
my friend and not have it turn sour was if I was in a state of balance -
when I had no needs and no expectations. Only when I was perfectly willing
to accept whatever my friend wanted to do, when I was content to listen to
whatever my friend wanted to say, did we get along. Any expression of need
on my part was ignored or turned away.
Maybe its a sign of my immaturity - but somehow, it felt that this was out
of balance. It seemed that we only got along when I was giving and my
partner was taking. When I had nothing left to give and needed something
back, we fought. Today, my friends say they had seen this years ago - that
they felt the relationship was sucking the life out of me. I stayed because
I truly loved this person and I felt my outbursts of anger were a sign that
I wasn't working hard enough to keep the relationship alive. I ignored my
anger because I thought that is what a good eckist is supposed to do. I
ended up feeling like a doormat.
And maybe I'm looking to the wrong place for reassurance - I don't know. I
do know that I still feel pretty raw from the experience and would like to
talk about it with other spiritually minded individuals.