"Five Passions of the Mind"
KaraHolly
"Five things that very strongly stand in the way are the five passions of the
mind. The first is lust. It's not bad that we desire love or food or drink or
anything else. It's when the desire becomes too much, when it's too much of a
good thing."
"We're the path of moderation. For example, I discourage alcoholic beverages.
I'm not going to say, 'Absolutely none,' but I think anyone who is sincerely
interested in moving along the spiritual path in the most direct way won't
drink because alcoholic beverages cloud the mind and dull the awareness. To me
it's a contradiction when people say they are interested in unfolding
spiritually and at the same time they can't get along without their drink. On
the other hand, some medicines use alcohol as a preservative. You take those
because it's part of the healing process."
"An appetite for food, for love, and for drink are all OK because they're part
of living here. It's when the desire becomes too great that it's too much of a
good thing."
"The second passion is anger. Sometimes you feel you have been wronged and you
need to stand up for yourself. And you make a point of it--you do whatever you
can to correct the situation, and then you move on. But some people object too
much. Too much of a good thing in this case becomes anger and its children,
like criticism and gossip. These are all signs of anger."
"The third passion is greed. We want things. We should have things because we
need things to live here. For instance, don't try to get through a Minnesota
winter without a coat. You need a coat. You probably don't need twenty coats;
maybe that's when you're crossing the line."
"We all occasionally take too much of something. It can be chocolate cake. It
can be anything."
"Another passion of the mind, the fourth, is attachment. It means when we have
home, family, or one of twenty coats--whatever--and we like them too much. We
do not like to let go of them. Again, it's just too much of a good thing."
"The fifth passion of the mind is vanity. There's nothing wrong with having a
good opinion of yourself. In fact, as a spiritual creation of God, wouldn't
you have a good opinion of yourself? Sure you would. But vanity is too much
of a good thing. It's when you begin thinking you are better than the other
creations of God around you. You think you are a lot better, and you lord it
over others. This is vanity."
"Any of these passions--lust, anger, greed, attachment, and vanity --are simply
just too much of a good thing."
From "Our Spiritual Wake Up Calls" pg 68, by Harold Klemp,
Copyright (c) 1997 ECKANKAR. All rights reserved.
For information about Eckankar:
http://www.eckankar.org
or Phone 1(888) LOVE GOD
SoulWords
>"Any of these passions--lust, anger, greed, attachment, and vanity --are
>simply
>just too much of a good thing."
>
>From "Our Spiritual Wake Up Calls" pg 68, by Harold Klemp,
>Copyright (c) 1997 ECKANKAR. All rights reserved.
>
find that
balance, moderation, and gradual lettting
go of old habits as the holy fire of
Spirit, the slow-burning love of God, is ever
brighter in our hearts.
Love in ECK, David
arel...@mindspring.com
> Copyright (c) 1997 ECKANKAR. All rights reserved.
> The fifth passion of the mind is vanity. There's nothing wrong with having a
> good opinion of yourself. In fact, as a spiritual creation of God, wouldn't
> you have a good opinion of yourself? Sure you would. But vanity is too much
> of a good thing. It's when you begin thinking you are better than the other
> creations of God around you. You think you are a lot better, and you lord it
> over others. This is vanity."
<snip>
I was wondering.....would a person claiming to hold and maintain the
highest consciousness IN THE WORLD fall into this vanity category? <gg>
Lurk
Joe
Dear Mr. Lurk,
Thank you for your question about ECKANKAR, The Path of Total Awareness.
There are many such questions that can arise in the mind of a spiritual seeker
like yourself. However, it's important to remember that true spirituality is
necessarily BEYOND all questions, as it's about states of consciousness beyond
the mind.
That being so, the best answer to your question is the answer you will surely
receive when you look within yourself and surrender to the ECK, or Spirit.
There are practical ways of doing this. One way is to practice a simple
spiritual exercise, like chanting HU, an ancient name for God. Another way is
to become a member of ECKANKAR.
As an ECK member you will receive a set of discourses from Harold Klemp, the
present Mahanta, the Living ECK Master. You will also then be eligible to
attend many Eckankar functions, at which you will meet many Eckists like
yourself and wiil be able to discuss the Eck teachings in more depth.
Hope this was helpful!
In ECK,
Joe O'Leary
THE MAHA VAHANA!
Sharon V Comstock
Lurk wrote:
>I was wondering.....would a person claiming to hold and maintain the
highest consciousness IN THE WORLD fall into this vanity category? <gg>
Perhaps, unless this person was making these extravagant claims
to perhaps get the attention of people who were looking for
someone who made these extravagant claims, to lead them to
where they found the true spiritual freedom to understand. . .
HUgs,
Sharon
Sharon V Comstock
>>Joe wrote a letter from Eckankar -
Gee, Joe, if you don't mind the weather you can get a job
in Minnesota & eventually move up from just darn good
writing - no proofreading required!
You, too, can buy a jet plane some day!
me
arel...@mindspring.com
To understand what? The vanity within one's self that resonates with the
guru's vanity?
Your explanation is creative, though: My guru is vain so he can lure
seekers away from other vain gurus.
That's a rather vain assumptive explanation about the other gurus being
vain, eh? <gg>
Vanity breeds vanity, no?
Lurk
>
> HUgs,
>
> Sharon
Sharon V Comstock
On Sat, 25 Jul 1998 arel...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Sharon V Comstock wrote:
> >
> > Lurk wrote:
> >
> > >I was wondering.....would a person claiming to hold and maintain the
> > highest consciousness IN THE WORLD fall into this vanity category? <gg>
> >
> >
> > Perhaps, unless this person was making these extravagant claims
> > to perhaps get the attention of people who were looking for
> > someone who made these extravagant claims, to lead them to
> > where they found the true spiritual freedom to understand. . .
>
> To understand what? The vanity within one's self that resonates with the
> guru's vanity?
>
> Your explanation is creative, though: My guru is vain so he can lure
> seekers away from other vain gurus.
Excuse me for leaving the above re-post mess, but I need it
there. . .okay, this isn't exactly what I meant "my guru is
vainer than your guru:
Some people need a strong leader-figure. Some people are
looking for someone who presents themselves much as God
did in the Old Testament. Turned me totally off, but
it certainly attracted others. Not because of a seeker's
vanity - though indeed that may be the case sometimes -
an overinflated self-image that needs to associate with
something like itself.
But I think it's more likely from people's own inner
insecurities. . .and their reliance on the outer. Just
as many people base their self-esteem on their cars.
Sort of like teenagers - male & female - who are so
impressed by fancy sports cars with loud stereos - I'll
frequently say "now, there's a guy who obviously is
compensating for a teeny-tiny penis."
The thing is, the guy driving the car may be well-endowed
(although size doesn't matter except to those for whom
it's important), he may indeed be a really nice, self-
confident well-balanced guy who happens to like fancy
sports cars & loud music. And he may end up only meeting
bimboes who don't see him as a person - just as an
object with a fantastic car! Or, he may be a great
Spiritual Master, and because I may find fancy cars
with loud music a total turn-off, I may be missing the
opportunity to benefit from his wisdom.
It's sort of like Barney the Dinosaur. I was just thinking earlier this
week how I could make a religion of the Holy Words of Barney -- start a
church, maybe make enough money to buy a new set of tires -- there are
plenty of loyal Barney followers out there --- and many if not more Barney
detractors. Some of them, I've learned, have never even watched Barney
or listened to HIM - just blindly following the PC sort of "in" Barney
bashing crowd.
I like Barney sometimes, although I don't space out & become entranced.
I've had some good laughs at the Barney-bashing website.
I can testify, though, that Barney is a channel for Spirit, and has worked
a beautiful miracle in at least one person's life. My father is a mean,
nasty abusive s.o.b. - he means well, though. But he's still verbally
abusing his children & wife. But he & my mother are raising a
granddaughter who's three now, so he's been exposed to the usual kiddie
TV stuff, since he's now disabled & spends most of his time watching TV.
My whole family almost had a group heart attack when not too long ago he
burst out singing "I love you, you love me. . ." I joke around a lot,
but believe me, I am serious about this. (Not about starting a Barney
religion, but about the miracle.)
HUgs,
Sharon
>
>
arel...@mindspring.com
I agree a more common scenario is this larger than life figure attracts
insecure people. But I don't agree completely with your qualification
that this is simply a reliance on the outer. I think, by definition, an
insecure person does not trust themselves very much and when they come
upon some spiritual answer man with such self proclaimed superhuman
qualities, they find security in associating/identifying with such
figure and their doctrines. To me, that is a form of inner reliance.
I would love to know what the distinction is between inner and outer
reliance and how an insecure person who is drawn to OZ can arrive at
this inner reliance that is suppose to do wonders. If you want people to
get in touch with their own voice, why take the convoluted route of
embracing a mythical voice?
I mean, when someone accepts and internalizes Harold's truth (which BTW,
is presented as "the truth of all ages"), I really don't see that as a
productive doorway to developing one's trust in one's self. That's just
allowing yet another authority figure to commandeer one's
consciousness....it's a giving up of one's power instead of reclaiming
it.
I know eckists claim that this is a temporary condition until one gets
on their spiritual feet or until they have the realization of "I am
he." It has been asserted that eckankar tricks you into high states.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand the mechanics and
progression below leads to freedom.
Insecure person is attracted to spiritual superman. Insecure person's
identifies with authority figure's truth and elitist doctrines and
insecurities subside. A false self-esteem is set into place and the
insecure person experiences a new freedom from their insecure baggage.
They never felt this good in all of life.
Meanwhile, the inner reasons for the original insecurities are not
address, are ignored or repressed, which means this new self-esteem is
on a unstable foundation. This is not freedom to me, this is creating
human time bombs.
>
> Sort of like teenagers - male & female - who are so
> impressed by fancy sports cars with loud stereos - I'll
> frequently say "now, there's a guy who obviously is
> compensating for a teeny-tiny penis."
So are you saying that Harold acts out this superman master authority
because he has teeny-tiny penis? <ggg>
>
> The thing is, the guy driving the car may be well-endowed
> (although size doesn't matter except to those for whom
> it's important), he may indeed be a really nice, self-
> confident well-balanced guy who happens to like fancy
> sports cars & loud music. And he may end up only meeting
> bimboes who don't see him as a person - just as an
> object with a fantastic car! Or, he may be a great
> Spiritual Master, and because I may find fancy cars
> with loud music a total turn-off, I may be missing the
> opportunity to benefit from his wisdom.
Sharon, when I come upon an analogy like this, I feel compelled to do a
what I call an analogy makeover. May I?
For your analogy to be more accurate, you would need to have the guy be
a Amish spiritual man who travels around from town to town preaching to
people about the virtues of living the simple life. How not to
complicated life with 20th Century gear. How there is a tremendous
feeling of freedom from not having to live with such things a cars.
And....of course, he travels from town to town in a fancy sports cars
playing loud music to preach this message.
Yes, I suppose, even under these conditions, he could have some valuable
things to say about the simple life, I just can't help but notice the
fancy car and the message it carries.
Lurk
ToTo
they are all within and always have been. But like Dorothy, she just
could not believe that the truths lied within her.
She needed to project those thoughts onto something concrete and
physical. She knew deep down inside that what she wanted to do, she was
always capable of doing. This outer figure had no power over her. He
couldn't change the way she thought or work miracles. If she wanted
something she had it within herself (the Light and SOund of God) all she
had to do was look within and draw on that. But no matter what she would
have been told, she chose to go through trials and danger to seek who
she thought was the GIVER.
The LEM is a sort of Wizard to those that need a focal point and he is
empowered to perform in a sense that he is of the Light and Sound.
The Wizard (OZ is the city) only guided Dorothy and her friends to see
that they could go home on their own. But they still didn't believe him,
so he got the old Balloon out and tried again in an impossible way to
take her from the OZ to Kansas.
But she couldn't use that vehicle. It was an outer vehicle taking her
from two planes that did not connect physically. She had to go within.
There she could use her vehicle that could travel through different
planes, the soul.
Now I hope you can grasp the difference from the outer and inner.
Once out of the physical the LEM can navigate. Here in the earth plane
he has his heads in the clouds, but his feet firmly planted (rooted) on
the ground.
TOTO!
Sharon V Comstock
On Sun, 26 Jul 1998 arel...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> I mean, when someone accepts and internalizes Harold's truth (which BTW,
> is presented as "the truth of all ages"),
I don't see it as "Harold's" truth, or even Eckankar's
truth.
I really don't see that as a
> productive doorway to developing one's trust in one's self. That's just
> allowing yet another authority figure to commandeer one's
> consciousness....it's a giving up of one's power instead of reclaiming
> it.
I agree - it's not productive for me, and evidently not for you,
but that's not to say it's not productive for others.
>
> I know eckists claim that this is a temporary condition until one gets
> on their spiritual feet or until they have the realization of "I am
> he." It has been asserted that eckankar tricks you into high states.
> Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand the mechanics and
> progression below leads to freedom.
You understand quite well, Lurk. Not only do you understand,
but with your vocabulary & intellectual talents, you are much
better equipped than I am to explain it!
Also, when you make statements like "eckists claim" - well,
that's a little too generalized, and not something I focus on.
I realized first that "I am THAT" - then learned about Eckankar
on the outer.
> > Insecure person is attracted to spiritual superman. Insecure person's
> identifies with authority figure's truth and elitist doctrines and
> insecurities subside. A false self-esteem is set into place and the
> insecure person experiences a new freedom from their insecure baggage.
> They never felt this good in all of life.
>
Social Psych II here. Also a basis in multi-level marketing.
> Meanwhile, the inner reasons for the original insecurities are not
> address, are ignored or repressed, which means this new self-esteem is
> on a unstable foundation. This is not freedom to me, this is creating
> human time bombs.
For me, the inner master was there through the blow-
up, and through rebuilding from the foundation up.
For others, it may well be different.
> Sharon, when I come upon an analogy like this, I feel compelled to do a
> what I call an analogy makeover. May I?
Yes, of course - yours was probably much better, but I
tend to draw from real-life examples.
> Yes, I suppose, even under these conditions, he could have some valuable
> things to say about the simple life, I just can't help but notice the
> fancy car and the message it carries.
I see your point. However, you and I look at Eckankar
differently. And we definitely see Harold differently.
I think everyone should discover their own truth, both
inner and outer. They work together.
HUgs,
Sharon
arel...@mindspring.com
> > is presented as "the truth of all ages"),
>
> truth.
>
> > productive doorway to developing one's trust in one's self. That's just
> > allowing yet another authority figure to commandeer one's
> > consciousness....it's a giving up of one's power instead of reclaiming
> > it.
>
> but that's not to say it's not productive for others.
Well, if it is productive for someone else, I sure like to know how.
>
> >
> > I know eckists claim that this is a temporary condition until one gets
> > on their spiritual feet or until they have the realization of "I am
> > he." It has been asserted that eckankar tricks you into high states.
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand the mechanics and
> > progression below leads to freedom.
>
> You understand quite well, Lurk. Not only do you understand,
> but with your vocabulary & intellectual talents, you are much
> better equipped than I am to explain it!
I'm not trying to be coy here, Sharon, I'm asking a sincere question.
Why does the religion whose major tenets are personal responsibility and
truth find it necessary to deny people an opportunity to take
responsibility by using untruthfulness, trickery/lies as a means to
convey spiritual truth?
Also, I thought eckankar had some tenet about asking someone's
permission to enter their physic space or play around with their
consciousness. No one ask me permission whether it was alright to use
lies and deceit to bolster my belief power when I was in eckankar!
I think new people should be aware that part of the eckankar technique
is for the master to lie to students.
And I don't believe for a moment that Harold simply uses a superman
image of himself as a prop for other people's benefit. He's into his
role. He believes he some special god-like figure....he kind of says
this in about every tenth paragraph in the texts....even in the super
secret HI discourses where the readers are suppose to be beyond myths.
>
> Also, when you make statements like "eckists claim" - well,
> that's a little too generalized, and not something I focus on.
>
> I realized first that "I am THAT" - then learned about Eckankar
> on the outer.
>
> > > Insecure person is attracted to spiritual superman. Insecure person's
> > identifies with authority figure's truth and elitist doctrines and
> > insecurities subside. A false self-esteem is set into place and the
> > insecure person experiences a new freedom from their insecure baggage.
> > They never felt this good in all of life.
> >
> Social Psych II here. Also a basis in multi-level marketing.
Many similarities between how multi-level marketing operates and is
promoted and eckankar. Maybe that's why there are so many multi-level
marketers in eckankar....It's not that far of a leap from their
spiritual framework....It's comfortable.
>
> > Meanwhile, the inner reasons for the original insecurities are not
> > address, are ignored or repressed, which means this new self-esteem is
> > on a unstable foundation. This is not freedom to me, this is creating
> > human time bombs.
>
> For me, the inner master was there through the blow-
> up, and through rebuilding from the foundation up.
Why does Harold, using his elitist doctrines, help create the human time
bombs in the first place? Why not start someone out on the path using
such notions as truth and honesty, and perhaps there would be no human
time bombs to blow up and rebuild. What's going on here.....is someone
ensuring their utility or what?
>
> For others, it may well be different.
>
>
> > Sharon, when I come upon an analogy like this, I feel compelled to do a
> > what I call an analogy makeover. May I?
>
> Yes, of course - yours was probably much better, but I
> tend to draw from real-life examples.
>
> > Yes, I suppose, even under these conditions, he could have some valuable
> > things to say about the simple life, I just can't help but notice the
> > fancy car and the message it carries.
>
> I see your point. However, you and I look at Eckankar
> differently. And we definitely see Harold differently.
>
> I think everyone should discover their own truth, both
> inner and outer. They work together.
I'm all for that! I just don't think being lured by a superhuman
authority figure is helpful in that process of discovering one's own
truth, one's own inner voice or authority. In fact, I think it takes
people in the other direction ever so subtly. It's too easy to get
entangled and trapped with the eckankar belief system that continually
inflates egos of its members as it promotes itself as a better spiritual
mouse trap....correction: the ultimate spiritual mouse trap.
Lurk
john.london
I must be in a totally different Eckankar that the one you were exposed to!
I wouldn't want to be in that one either!
:)
John London
rainforest
Vanity
..."Fifth, is Ahankra, vanity, the last of the deadly five. The word
Ahankara has two meanings. First it is the faculty if the mind which
gives the power of awareness of Soul, self-differentiation, the I-ness.
It is that faulity which executes the mandates of the Buddhi, or the
SUGMAD, in the interest of self. But the abnormal exaggeration of this
faculty becomes the Ahankara, which is vanity, or self-admiration.
Ahankara has a thousand claws by which to dig into the minds of it's
victims. It's deadly infiltrates the entire being. Beginning generally
in infancy, it seldom ceases to operate until the death of the body and
then it still can carry on, untill Soul shakes it off in some manner or
by the help of a teacher.
It is the work of self-righteousness which makes it so strong. It is the
last of the five deadly passions to surrender. Its method is to distort
the viewpoint, to present everything out of proportion, to make itself
the center of the world. It distroys all sense of humor.
Some of the phases of Ahankara are: bigotry, self-assertion, obtrusive
show of wealth or power, bossiness, scolding, faultfinding, liking
publicity, making a show of religion, and being noisy about giving to
charity.
...."One cannot assume the attitude of self-righteousness. This
automatically defetes his own purpose and nullifies all progress made.
He must keep Ahankara, vanity, subdued, and he must allow charity and
love of knowledge, power, and strength to have full sway over his
thoughts and actions.
The Far Country, by Paulji, p. 61,74
rainforest
Baraka Bashad, George
Joe
These words were first penned by Julian Johnson. Not Paul Twitchell.
Sharon V Comstock
Hi ToTo/Rainforest -
I believe you're relatively new here - or I've just forgotten -
recall seeing you recently - anyway, thanks for this post which was a
re-post of a previous lurk/me one with an additional lovely explanation
using the example of the Wizard of Oz, plus the new addition of the
excerpt from "The Far Country"
Just want to say thanks for all that reposting, I had evidently
missed the Wizard of Oz stuff when you originally posted it - beautiful,
a great explanation - thank you!
HUgs,
Sharon
Sharon V Comstock
Oh, George - it's you!
Takes me awhile!
HUgs,
Sharon
rainforest
And Julian Johnson got it from Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe) and he
got it from W. Y. Evans-Wentz and so on and so on back through the
Upanashads, back, back, back through an unbroken chain of life to the
beginning of time.
The point is spiritual literature is not like a fiction novel where the
creation comes through as a new archytype. Even the patent office allows
for the same invention created in different way.
The sacred books of the Hindus espically hindu Darma translated in 1919
by Rai Bahadar Srisa Chandra Vidyarnava, 1881-1918? Allahabad mentions
the concept of Ahankara in relation to the sensorium of the mind. Also
in The Bhagavad-Gita, same thing.
There is a doctrine called The Vishnu Purana which states that every so
often in certain ages will reincarnate the spirit of a Soul called a
compiler, whose job it is to gather up spiritual information and compile
it for that age. Something like a Tashi Lama (Jewel Gathering Lama) who
is the Tulku of Wodpagmed (Skt. Amitabha) He of boundless light, the
Buddha Who Illuminates, or Enlightens. The avalokiteshvara,
Avalokita=seen, and Ishvara=Lord, the Lord who is seen within, also is
synonymous with the Christos within.
Having said that, i feel that Paulji was this compiler of the smashed
Mirror Of Sugmad and had the spiritual right to regroup these spiritual
insights.
Lets face it square on, we all would not be here if it was no for
Paulji's courage to do what he did and Lane with all his followers would
be out of a job and we would all be still stumbling around in the dark
creating Latitudes and Platitudes.
Withe Love In the ECK,
Baraka Bashad, George
Nathan Zafran
wrote:
>And Julian Johnson got it from Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe) and he
>got it from W. Y. Evans-Wentz and so on and so on back through the
>Upanashads, back, back, back through an unbroken chain of life to the
>beginning of time.
>The point is spiritual literature is not like a fiction novel where the
>creation comes through as a new archytype. Even the patent office allows
>for the same invention created in different way.
>The sacred books of the Hindus espically hindu Darma translated in 1919
>by Rai Bahadar Srisa Chandra Vidyarnava, 1881-1918? Allahabad mentions
>the concept of Ahankara in relation to the sensorium of the mind. Also
>in The Bhagavad-Gita, same thing.
>There is a doctrine called The Vishnu Purana which states that every so
>often in certain ages will reincarnate the spirit of a Soul called a
>compiler, whose job it is to gather up spiritual information and compile
>it for that age. Something like a Tashi Lama (Jewel Gathering Lama) who
>is the Tulku of Wodpagmed (Skt. Amitabha) He of boundless light, the
>Buddha Who Illuminates, or Enlightens. The avalokiteshvara,
>Avalokita=seen, and Ishvara=Lord, the Lord who is seen within, also is
>synonymous with the Christos within.
Well said.
>Having said that, i feel that Paulji was this compiler of the smashed
>Mirror Of Sugmad and had the spiritual right to regroup these spiritual
>insights.
Right on. And I believe that Paul had full support of the Vairagi
Adepts who were guiding him, as well as the Council of Nine Silent
Masters who oversee the inner and outer teachings of the Light and
Sound principle. To them, he was performing a heroic task that would
create the basis for a new vortex of spiritual power that would
quickly emerge from Paul's efforts. We see this now, over 30 years
later, in the energy that has manifested as the present teaching of
Eckankar. This power flow, or energy current, is by far the highest
vibration of any spiritual path on the planet, and undoubtedly
anywhere else in the universe where it also manifests. While Eckankar
may not be the best path for everyone, it has the greatest potential
for leading Soul back to God for those who are able to resonate with
Its energy.
>Lets face it square on, we all would not be here if it was no for
>Paulji's courage to do what he did and Lane with all his followers would
>be out of a job and we would all be still stumbling around in the dark
>creating Latitudes and Platitudes.
For this I will always be grateful for Paul's efforts in compiling the
outer teachings of Eckankar, and, in the process, making it possible
to allow the ancient inner teachings of the Light and Sound to
manifest here.
Love in Eck,
Nathan
Sharon V Comstock
HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
May the Blessings be!
HUge HUgs,
Sharon
Sharon V Comstock
Nathan wrote: >>
For this I will always be grateful for Paul's efforts in compiling the
outer teachings of Eckankar, and, in the process, making it possible
to allow the ancient inner teachings of the Light and Sound to
manifest here.
And I am grateful for Harold for simplifying and
refining the teachings into something that doesn't
get my mind spinning, and speaks directly from the
heart of the Sugmad to my heart!
HUgs,
Sharon
Michael Wallace
rainforest wrote in message <35C2D6...@escape.ca>...
>
>Lets face it square on, we all would not be here if it was no for
>Paulji's courage to do what he did and Lane with all his followers would
>be out of a job and we would all be still stumbling around in the dark
>creating Latitudes and Platitudes.
>
Sounds good to me!
Can't argue with the logic...
I even read it with a Scottish Accent and it STILL made sense, so it has to
be right.
Love
Michael
Joe
>
>On Sat, 01 Aug 1998 08:52:09 GMT, rainforest <rain...@escape.ca>
>wrote:
>
>
>>And Julian Johnson got it from Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe)
Not so. Avalon wrote about kundalini yoga!
and he
>>got it from W. Y. Evans-Wentz
? Evans-Wentz wrote about Tibetan Buddhism!
Julian Johnson wrote about Sant Mat. Which is rather disparate from either
K-yoga or Buddhism.
and so on and so on back through the
>>Upanashads, back, back, back through an unbroken chain of life to the
>>beginning of time.
You may argue that spirituality and spiritual teachings have existed from
antiquity. And that of course is indisputable.
But that fact side-steps the question: why does so much of Twitchell's writings
bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
A similarity not merely of a general theme, but of style. And not merely of
style, but of specific content. That is, paragraph by paragraph in THE FAR
COUNTRY is similar to paragraph after paragraph in Julian Johnson's THE PATH OF
THE MASTERS.
>>The point is spiritual literature is not like a fiction novel where the
>>creation comes through as a new archytype. Even the patent office allows
>>for the same invention created in different way.
Yes, but there is also such a thing as plagiarism.
>>The sacred books of the Hindus espically hindu Darma translated in 1919
>>by Rai Bahadar Srisa Chandra Vidyarnava, 1881-1918? Allahabad mentions
>>the concept of Ahankara in relation to the sensorium of the mind. Also
>>in The Bhagavad-Gita, same thing.
Yes, ahankara is an ancient Hindu term, sanskrit in origin. There's no problem
with anyone referring to, or talking about, ahankara.
The problem with Twitchell's paragraph on ahankara in THE FAR COUNTRY is that it
matches the tone, style and content of Julian Johnson's own explanation of the
term. Sentence by sentence.
On top of which: wasn't Rebezar Tarzs supposed to be the actual author of the
words, according to Twitchell?
>>There is a doctrine called The Vishnu Purana which states that every so
>>often in certain ages will reincarnate the spirit of a Soul called a
>>compiler, whose job it is to gather up spiritual information and compile
>>it for that age. Something like a Tashi Lama (Jewel Gathering Lama) who
>>is the Tulku of Wodpagmed (Skt. Amitabha) He of boundless light, the
>>Buddha Who Illuminates, or Enlightens. The avalokiteshvara,
>>Avalokita=seen, and Ishvara=Lord, the Lord who is seen within, also is
>>synonymous with the Christos within.
I would have little problem with Twitchell had he claimed to be the "Divine
Compiler." But he didn't do that. In fact, he hardly ever credited the many
works he took from.
That this is so makes him a plagiarist, not a compiler.
Whether or not he's Divine I can't say.
>
>Well said.
>
>
>snip>
Rich
> But that fact side-steps the question: why does so much of Twitchell's writings
> bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
http://home.naxs.com/rfpickett/rsmith.html
http://home.naxs.com/rfpickett/richard.html
> Whether or not he's Divine I can't say.
Right.
--
o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_ /____|___\_
(___________/
Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe
>
>Joe wrote:
>>
>> In article <35c32349.26247339@news>, eza...@direct.ca says...
>> >
>> >On Sat, 01 Aug 1998 08:52:09 GMT, rainforest <rain...@escape.ca>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>And Julian Johnson got it from Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe)
>>
>> Not so. Avalon wrote about kundalini yoga!
>>
>> and he
>> >>got it from W. Y. Evans-Wentz
>>
>> ? Evans-Wentz wrote about Tibetan Buddhism!
>>
>> Julian Johnson wrote about Sant Mat. Which is rather disparate from either
>> K-yoga or Buddhism.
>>
>> and so on and so on back through the
>> >>Upanashads, back, back, back through an unbroken chain of life to the
>> >>beginning of time.
>>
>> You may argue that spirituality and spiritual teachings have existed from
>> antiquity. And that of course is indisputable.
>>
>> bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >snip>
>
> The answers are not going to be found in the outer conscience. It just
>does not work that way. The questions are there, but the answers are
>within. If you don't get it now, you will sooner or later.
> What is the rush to do it now?
> Some people have trouble with mathematics which is simple to others.
>You won't get anywhere arguing with a mathematician about a wrong
>answer. The facts are the facts whether you get it or not is not for us
>to decide.
> I think what gets so old about this whole thing is that the people in
>Eckankar who are still in Eckankar have found it to be truth. I have
>proven it over and over again. It is no big mystery. If there were a
>class you could take like English or Arithmatic fine. But how do you
>explain truth? A person has to experience it for themselves. I have.
> I will never be convinced Eck is BS any more than a person who is a
>disbeliever with be convinced it is anything but that.
> Isn't there someplace to go to refer to the Dead Horse posts? This gets
>so old, same old same old.
> What happened to the Bill Flavell list, isn't there anything there that
>is new to interest you?
> As the mother who is tired of the children under her feet would say
>"Can't you just go outside and play?"
> Sheesh,
> WIndy
"Can't you just go outside and play?" Gee Windy. Where's the Eck love?
Someone posted what I considered to be erroneous info, in connection with
Eckankar. I replied to this with some info of my own.
Sorry if this bothers you. But there are some that find such stuff important to
their choice of a spiritual path.
Some don't, as well I know. They've crossed the Rubicon . . .
Joe
>
>Joe wrote:
>
>>But that fact side-steps the question: why does so much of Twitchell's writings
>> bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
>
Uchh . . .flummery and mumbojumbo . . .
>http://home.naxs.com/rfpickett/richard.html
Oh, this one's a prize! Here it is (my comments in brackets):
Path of the Masters
by Richard
(Reprinted with permission from HU-Talk)
I was no stranger to Julian Johnson though, and had made up my mind about
Twitchell and seeing The Path of the Masters long before ever getting on the
Internet. I'd had a copy of the book for a few years and treasured it almost
as much as all my other ECK books, because it had so much of the ECK stuff
in it.
Thanks for your comments! Regarding your HI/Satsang experience--remember
that in earlier days of ECKANKAR, we were often quite "Catholic" about our
teaching. Sri Harold has helped to dispel that enormously.
I too had Path of the Masters early on. Actually, I had been searching for a
teaching that didn't "stop." I wasn't sure what that meant, but I knew I
would know it when I found it. I read book after book about teaching after
teaching, and on about page 100, each of them would hit a wall.
Then I found Path of the Masters, and it didn't stop! I knew I had found
home. Only problem was, it was from 1939, and Julian Johnson was dead. But
I was determined to go to India to find the current Shabda Yoga Master. I
carried that book around for almost 2 years, until one day, in August of
1971, I met two ECKists who told me they heard I was into the sound current.
I was astounded there was somebody else who knew about the sound current.
I told them about Path of the Masters and wanting to go to India. They told
me about Paul and ECKANKAR and gave me a copy of the Shariyat, Book I. I
read it in one weekend! It was as if Path of the Masters was an OLD account
of the path of Light and Sound by a CHELA--and the Shariyat was a CURRENT
account of the Master's teachings BY the Master! I was indeed then HOME.
Instead of India, I went to Las Vegas (!) for the 5th World Wide, and became
an ECKist that day!
I never felt or experienced any conflict between the book and ECKANKAR. Path
of the Masters LED me to ECKANKAR, and, in fact, when I look inwardly and ask
to see the teacher Paul speaks of as Sudar Singh, I see a face that looks an
awful lot like Sawan Singh Ji, the old Master of Julian Johnson's.
I still have my copy of Path..., and still enjoy this "old" account.
[This Richard guy is so reasonable, so full of LOVE, ain't he?! But wait!]
I believe that if Julian Johnson were alive today, he would without doubt be
an ECKist.
[What, he'd disown Sawan Singh as his Spiritual Master--for Harold Klemp? And
he'd do this knowing that the books he'd written in praise of his Master and his
teaching were unrepentantly plagiarized by Paul Twitchell, founder of Eckankar?
Right . . . ]
And he would not waste his time with A.R.E. He had class, style
and love in his heart, and I sensed a man speaking from inside of love, not
judgment.
[Which means everyone--Eckists included--that post to A.R.E. ain't got no
class?]
For me, it's a matter of tone. Johnson had it, Lane doesn't.
[Or rather, Johnson had the same tone as Rebezar Tarzs!
Because--HELLO!--Twitchell plagiarized Johnson to CREATE Rebezar!]
[Or maybe Richard means that speaking and writing nicey-nicey is "spurichul,"
while those that call others on stuff like plagiarism is "waaay uncool man."]
No
need to assess anyone's accusations or comments. Their Being as Soul speaks
for itself.
[The pronouns here are indefinite . . . but I guess the gist of the argument
is--you guessed it--the mystical imperative!]
[Still, the chief question remains: WHOSE Being as Soul are we speaking of?
Julian Johnson's, Paul Twitchell's, or the fabled Rebezar Tarzs'?]
Seems pretty simple to me: Sri Harold--a Master of the tone of
Love; D Lane/A.R.E. debunkers: disgruntled brats.
[Wow, that's a clean, simple, and well-reasoned dichotomy! No one will accuse
you of cult-think!]
What's to discuss?
[Whether Jordan will retire this year? Or how 'bout: How to tell the difference
between the counterfeit and the real McCoy?]
Thanks again for your experience. I enjoyed reading about it.
In ECK,
Richard
Joe
>sunscreen on. There, feel better?
> WIndy
>
Considering it's about 100 degrees out here right now--yes!
rainforest
>
> Joe wrote:
> >
> > In article <35c32349.26247339@news>, eza...@direct.ca says...
> > >
> > >On Sat, 01 Aug 1998 08:52:09 GMT, rainforest <rain...@escape.ca>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>And Julian Johnson got it from Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe)
> >
> > Not so. Avalon wrote about kundalini yoga!
> >
> > and he
> > >>got it from W. Y. Evans-Wentz
> >
> > ? Evans-Wentz wrote about Tibetan Buddhism!
> >
> > Julian Johnson wrote about Sant Mat. Which is rather disparate from either
> > K-yoga or Buddhism.
> >
> > and so on and so on back through the
> > >>Upanashads, back, back, back through an unbroken chain of life to the
> > >>beginning of time.
> >
> > You may argue that spirituality and spiritual teachings have existed from
> > antiquity. And that of course is indisputable.
> >
> > bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
> >
> "Can't you just go outside and play?"
> Sheesh,
> WIndy
Great Tuzashot Windy!!!!!
The TRUTH (ECK) is still the TRUTH reguardless of the preceivers percep-
tion of IT.
Paulji once said, "There are no secrets in ECKANKAR, i could take the
ECK works and pile IT on the most crowded street corner in the world but
none may have the interest to read IT let alone the ability to
understand IT".
There is no such thing as poverty, (or impoverishment of Soul) only
impoverished consciousness.
ECKANKAR is the sum total of all the Yoga systems. Wether or not it is
Kundalini Yoga or Tibetan Yoga (which was a depository and a learning
institution of esoteric knowledge).
All the doctrines, no matter where they came from represent the body of
Yoga as a whole,
which mentions (in detail) the Light and Sound.
I. Hatha Yoga..............Breath...............Physical Body and
Vitality
II. Laya Yoga...............Will.................Powers of Mind
(1)...Bhakti Yoga.......Love.................Powers of Devine
Love
(2)...Shakti Yoga.......Energy...............Energizing Forces of
Nature
(3)...Mantra Yoga.......Sound................Powers of Sound
Vibrations
(Nada or Shabda Yoga is common to all Yoga Systems)
(4)...Yantra Yoga.......Form.................Powers of
Geometrical Form
III. Dhyana Yoga.............Thought..............Powers of
Thought-Processes
(Dhyana Yoga is common to all Yoga Systems)
IV. Raja Yoga...............Method...............Powers of
Discrimination
(1)...Jnana Yoga........Knowledge............Powers of Intellect
(2)...Karma Yoga........Activity.............Powers Of Action
(3)...Kundalini Yoga....Kundalini............Powers of the
Psychic-Nerve Force
(4)...Samadhi Yoga......Self.................Powers of Ecstasy
With Love In The ECK,
Baraka Bashad, George
arel...@mindspring.com
Been enjoying your posts as usual.
Did Dick really write this stuff below? This isn't one of your parodies,
is it? <gg> Boy, he never posted stuff like this to this NG. I guess
over on the Hu talk channel, Dick got a lot of ooohs and aahhhs from the
gallery for stuff like this. Over here, he basically hide behind his
search engine quotes knowing that he's get his logic spanked. <ggg>
Lurk
Joe wrote:
>
> In article <35C59D...@aloha.net>, Rich says...
> >
> >Joe wrote:
> >
> >>But that fact side-steps the question: why does so much of Twitchell's writings
> >> bear a remarkable similarity to the writings of a score of other authors?
> >
Joe
>
>Hey Joe,
>
>Been enjoying your posts as usual.
>
>Did Dick really write this stuff below? This isn't one of your parodies,
>is it? <gg> Boy, he never posted stuff like this to this NG. I guess
>over on the Hu talk channel, Dick got a lot of ooohs and aahhhs from the
>gallery for stuff like this. Over here, he basically hide behind his
>search engine quotes knowing that he's get his logic spanked. <ggg>
>
>Lurk
No, I don't think so; that is, what's posted below is from the URL that Rich
posted, from Pickett's page--but the "Richard" here isn't Richard Pickett. At
least it doesn't sound anything like him.
Thanks for the kind words, Lurk! Amazing, isn't it? We're both still around;
you'd think at least one of us would have "disappeared" by now. The bomb by my
name on the Pickett page had me a bit worried . . .
Well, have to go check my brake lines again! See ya.
Rich
Joe wrote:
>
> In article <35C239...@escape.ca>, rainforest says...
> >
> These words were first penned by Julian Johnson. Not Paul Twitchell.
--
Sharon V Comstock
Good Morning Everyone!
Just thought I'd pop in briefly, share a beautiful story I found
waiting on my cyber-doorway this morning, then off I go to enjoy a
beautiful day in the sun.
Found my estrogen & took a double-dose, spent some quality time
in the Light and Sound & feel refreshed & renewed!
HUgs,
Sharon
"The Window"
Two men, both seriously ill, occupied the same hospital room. One man
was allowed to sit up in his bed for an hour a day to drain the fluids from
his lungs. His bed was next to the room's only window. The other man had to
spend all his time flat on his back.
The men talked for hours on end. They spoke of their wives and
families, their homes, their jobs, their involvement in the military service,
where they had been on vacation. And every afternoon when the man in the bed
next to the window could sit up, he would pass the time by describing to his
roommate all the things he could see outside the window. The man in the
other bed would live for those one hour periods where his world would be
broadened and enliven by all the activity and color of the outside
world.
The window overlooked a park with a lovely lake, the man had said.
Ducks and swans played on the water while children sailed their model boats.
Lovers walked arm in arm amid flowers of every color of the rainbow.
Grand old trees graced the landscape, and a fine view of the city skyline could
be seen in the distance. As the man by the window described all this in
exquisite detail, the man on the other side of the room would close his
eyes and imagine the picturesque scene.
One warm afternoon the man by the window described a parade passing by.
Although the other man could not hear the band, he could see it in his
mind's eye as the gentleman by the window portrayed it with descriptive
words.
Unexpectedly, an alien thought entered his head: Why should he have all
the pleasure of seeing everything while I never get to see anything?
It didn't seem fair. As the thought fermented, the man felt ashamed at
first. But as the days passed and he missed seeing more sights, his envy
eroded into resentment and soon turned him sour. He began to brood and
found himself unable to sleep. He should be by that window - and that
thought now controlled his life.
Late one night as he lay staring at the ceiling, the man by the window
began to cough. He was choking on the fluid in his lungs. The other man
watched in the dimly lit room as the struggling man by the window groped
for the button to call for help. Listening from across the room, he never
moved, never pushed his own button which would have brought the nurse
running.
In less than five minutes, the coughing and choking stopped, along with
the sound of breathing. Now, there was only silence ---deathly silence.
The following morning the day nurse arrived to bring water for their
baths. When she found the lifeless body of the man by the window, she was
saddened and called the hospital attendant to take it away -- no works no
fuss. As soon as it seemed appropriate, the man asked if he could be moved
next to the window. The nurse was happy to make the switch and after
making sure he was comfortable, she left him alone. Slowly, painfully, he
propped himself up one elbow to take his first look. Finally, he would have the joy of
seeing it all himself. He strained to slowly turn to look out the window
beside the bed.
>>
It faced a blank wall.
>>So, the moral of the story is: the pursuit of happiness is a matter of
>choice...it is a positive attitude we consciously choose to express. It
is not a gift that gets delivered to our doorstep each morning, nor does
it come through the window. And I am certain that our circumstances are
just a small part of what makes us joyful. If we wait for them to get just
right, we will never find lasting joy.
The pursuit of happiness is an inward journey. Our minds are like
programs, awaiting for the code that will determine behaviors; like bank
vaults awaiting our deposits. If we regularly deposit positive,
encouraging, and uplifting thoughts, if we continue to bite our lips just
before we seemingly harmless negative thought as it germinates. You will
find that there is much to rejoice about.
>>
>>Author Unknown
>>
Joe
>
>#1 Joe ignores subject and brings up plagiarism.
>
>Joe wrote:
>>
>> In article <35C239...@escape.ca>, rainforest says...
>> >
>
>--
> o
> |
> ~/|
> _/ |\
> / | \
> -/ | \
> _ /____|___\_
> (___________/
>Rich~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
Oh, okay then.
"Vanity is a strong temptation to lying; it makes people magnify their merit,
over-flourish their family, and tell strange stories of their interest and
acquaintance." -- Jeremy Collier
Pretty much sums up the connection between Twitchell's plagiarism of Johnson
(and how many others) and his motivation for doing so. Imo.
Joe
>
>Thanks for the kind words, Lurk! Amazing, isn't it? We're both still
>around;
>you'd think at least one of us would have "disappeared" by now. The
>bomb by my
>name on the Pickett page had me a bit worried . . .
>
>Well, have to go check my brake lines again! See ya.
>
>I think the bomb is a sign of your being a blast of hot air, nothing
>more than that. I don't think it is any more of a threat to you than you
>are to yourself.;-)
> Windy
>
Perhaps you can be lawyer for the defense, Windy. But I'd come up with a more
compelling argument if I'z you.
glen
> Oh, okay then.
>
> "Vanity is a strong temptation to lying; it makes people magnify their merit,
> over-flourish their family, and tell strange stories of their interest and
> acquaintance." -- Jeremy Collier
>
> Pretty much sums up the connection between Twitchell's plagiarism of Johnson
> (and how many others) and his motivation for doing so. Imo.
You always were pretty good at finding quotes:)
Funny how this one relates pretty much to what you do here on a.r.e. as well.
How do you manage to find the time for this much writing . . . I'm home
for the summer . . . that's how I get here a few times a day . . . . is
the realty business that slow or are you writing in from the office now?
:)
--
glen
SoulWords
>>>So, the moral of the story is: the pursuit of happiness is a matter of
>>choice...it is a positive attitude we consciously choose to express. It
>is not a gift that gets delivered to our doorstep each morning, nor does
>it come through the window. And I am certain that our circumstances are
>just a small part of what makes us joyful. If we wait for them to get just
>right, we will never find lasting joy.
>
>The pursuit of happiness is an inward journey. Our minds are like
>programs, awaiting for the code that will determine behaviors; like bank
>vaults awaiting our deposits. If we regularly deposit positive,
>encouraging, and uplifting thoughts, if we continue to bite our lips just
>before we seemingly harmless negative thought as it germinates. You will
>find that there is much to rejoice about.
>>>
Thanks, Sharon!
It was SO interesting that there was another post on Positive Attitudes
on
this thread, then the next post was retitled
Five Passions of the Mind!!!!!
Do you prefer panoramic windows,
in gorgeous cyrstal- clear colors?
Then find a superb window-washing solvent, like the spiritual exercises
of ECK!
Love in ECK, David
Galuuk
Great post on "positive attitudes" and Mrs Thompson.
Joey
Sharon V Comstock
>> Do you prefer panoramic windows,
in gorgeous cyrstal- clear colors?
Then find a superb window-washing solvent, like the spiritual
exercises of ECK!
Love in ECK, David
David, this is SO strange! No I guess it's not - there are no
coincidences in Eckankar
Tonight at the church office, folding bulletins, I was reading thru
the printed scriptures as I folded. Suddenly my eyesight got very
clear, and my brain seemed very clear, and I had what I can only describe
as a feeling of revulsion, sort of aimed at what I was reading.
It was just so odd - so I looked closely at what I was reading -- it
was an old testament passage, one about that angry, jealous, boastful,
revengeful god -- I don't really read that stuff, I automatically
just skim over it quickly until I get to some good stuff - the message
of love or something.
I felt sort of bad that I'd experienced a feeling of revulsion at the
bible - I do like much of it - the parts that always resonated within my
heart from childhood - but so much of it just never rang true, and didn't
give me a very good feeling about god. After I became an Eckist, I
realized that what I'd always loved about the bible was the teachings
of Eckankar, which are there, but sometimes you've got to do a little
digging.
It's funny, although sometimes the Eckankar vocabular seems a bit strange
to me, I've always felt totally comfortable with the Sugmad -- altho I've
only experienced a small amount of the absolutely pure truth & beauty of
Its Being (and that little bit was almost more than I could handle!) -
it's a beautiful word, and one that's totally free of the negative
associations from childhood with the word god.
For some reason, I was really in a good mood tonight & just Huing my
head off - one reason why I like working in the church, it's quiet, I'm
alone, and I can HU as much & as loudly as I please. (except, of course,
for taking a few time-outs when the photocopier acts up. Sometimes
I ask forgiveness, then let loose with a few profanities. Hey, no one's
perfect - I'm sure if god had to deal with that machine, he'd hurl a
few lightning bolts or something!!)
It's just so. . .Ecky. . .that after that experience I should find you
writing about the clarity we get from our spiritual exercises!
HUgs,
Sharon
Rich
> >>So, the moral of the story is: the pursuit of happiness is a matter of
> >choice...it is a positive attitude we consciously choose to express. It
> is not a gift that gets delivered to our doorstep each morning, nor does
> it come through the window. And I am certain that our circumstances are
> just a small part of what makes us joyful. If we wait for them to get just
> right, we will never find lasting joy.
>
> The pursuit of happiness is an inward journey. Our minds are like
> programs, awaiting for the code that will determine behaviors; like bank
> vaults awaiting our deposits. If we regularly deposit positive,
> encouraging, and uplifting thoughts, if we continue to bite our lips just
> before we seemingly harmless negative thought as it germinates. You will
> find that there is much to rejoice about.
> >>
Wonderful story Sharon. Thanks.
"Happiness is an attitude. We either make ourselves miserable, or happy
and strong. The amount of work is the same." - Francesca Reigler
zep...@connectexpress.com
Sharon V Comstock <scom...@cub.kcnet.org> wrote:
>
> Two men, both seriously ill, occupied the same hospital room. One man
> was allowed to sit up in his bed for an hour a day to drain the fluids from
> his lungs.
Sorry, it's a touching story, and of course I get the
point, but it doesn't make sense medically. It's been
known for more than 50 years how to position patients
so that their lungs can drain properly. You don't
"allow" them to "sit up" for an hour a day; you place
them in one or more of a dozen prescribed positions,
depending on what portion of the lung is creating the
fluid.
If the man were really seriously ill, he wouldn't be
left alone; a nurse would be there to supervise his
positions, to provide mechanical suction if he couldn't
breathe, to help him cough, etc.
Kate
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Galuuk
<<<<< Sorry, it's a touching story, and of course I get the
point, but it doesn't make sense medically. It's been
known for more than 50 years how to position patients
so that their lungs can drain properly. You don't
"allow" them to "sit up" for an hour a day; you place
them in one or more of a dozen prescribed positions,
depending on what portion of the lung is creating the
fluid.
If the man were really seriously ill, he wouldn't be
left alone; a nurse would be there to supervise his
positions, to provide mechanical suction if he couldn't
breathe, to help him cough, etc. >>>>>
Kate, aren't you being a bit picky here???
Sharon said she got this off the net somewhere.
She didn't say it happened to her.
Geez Kate......did you kick the dog this morning too?????
Joe
P.S. I think it's time to bring Vanessa back....at least she's cordial.
Sharon V Comstock
On Thu, 6 Aug 1998 zep...@connectexpress.com wrote:
> Sorry, it's a touching story, and of course I get the
> point, but it doesn't make sense medically. It's been
> known for more than 50 years how to position patients
> so that their lungs can drain properly. You don't
> "allow" them to "sit up" for an hour a day; you place
> them in one or more of a dozen prescribed positions,
> depending on what portion of the lung is creating the
> fluid.
>
> If the man were really seriously ill, he wouldn't be
> left alone; a nurse would be there to supervise his
> positions, to provide mechanical suction if he couldn't
> breathe, to help him cough, etc.
>
> Kate
>
You know, Kate, I have to say I agree with you on this one. To be honest,
although the story is quite obviously fictional, I posted it simply for
the message.
I didn't think about the medical details, although that should have
registered immediately - my daughter's been an extended care nurse for
10 years, and she's now a DON. My father has lung disease, and I've
had chronic bronchitis since birth. There have been many times when I've
had to sleep sitting in a chair.
But what especially didn't ring true with me on this one is that the
other man let the sick one die. I find it hard to believe that anyone
could be so heartless and cruel. But we all know it happens. Not only
do some people become so blinded by lust and greed that they'll allow
their fellow man to die, but they'll often murder someone to get what they
want.
And on the other hand, the reality about the medical profession is that
while a lot of things are known, it's not always practiced. In real
life, there are many elderly and sick people whose pain and suffering
could be greatly eased if if weren't for the problem of the expense.
And then there's the problem of doctors and nurses who could really care
less about their patients. My daughter has a heck of a time finding
good nurses, nurses who care enough to do they very best they can for
their patients. And the documentation needed to get rid of the bad ones
is impossible.
So actually, although I agree with you totally about the honesty, perhaps
you & I both are just too idealistic.
And the important thing is, maybe someone in the medical profession will
read this story - a nurse, perhaps - and be inspired to pay closer
attention to the physical needs of the patient. And other people will
read this story, and be inspired to be more loving towards their fellow
human beings.
HUgs,
Sharon
zep...@connectexpress.com
gal...@aol.com (Galuuk) wrote:
> Kate......you wrote.....
>
> <<<<< Sorry, it's a touching story, and of course I get the
> point, but it doesn't make sense medically. It's been
> known for more than 50 years how to position patients
> so that their lungs can drain properly. You don't
> "allow" them to "sit up" for an hour a day; you place
> them in one or more of a dozen prescribed positions,
> depending on what portion of the lung is creating the
> fluid.
>
> If the man were really seriously ill, he wouldn't be
> left alone; a nurse would be there to supervise his
> positions, to provide mechanical suction if he couldn't
> breathe, to help him cough, etc. >>>>>
>
>
> Sharon said she got this off the net somewhere.
>
> She didn't say it happened to her.
But the whole point of the story is that one guy got
to sit up and the other one didn't, and when the thing
upon which the whole story hangs is completely implaus-
ible, it ruins the story.
> Geez Kate......did you kick the dog this morning too?????
Don't have a dog; I have two cats. The last time
(the only time) I kicked a dog was when one ran
after me while I was riding a bicycle years ago
and tried to bite my foot. I kicked him right
in the jaw, whereupon he decided I wasn't any fun
and went back to his own yard.
> Joe
>
> P.S. I think it's time to bring Vanessa back....at least she's cordial.
Sorry.
zep...@connectexpress.com
saxm...@bellsouth.net wrote:
> My girlfriend from grade school had a daughter who suffered from cystic
> fibrosis.
<snip>
> Marsha said that daily she would have to pound on the girl's back and
> loosen up all the phlegm that accumulated in her grand daughters body.
Ugh, that's a horrible disease -- did the daughter
live? I've seen that therapy on tv news shows, and
have often wondered if the lithotripter machines that
they use to break up kidney stones could be used to
help kids with cf. Of course, they're big and ex-
pensive, and the hand pounding can be done at home
while the lithotripter has to stay at the hospital.
<snip>
> I hear they are coming up with new treatments every day for those who
> suffer from mental illnesses also. My father-in-law suffers from
> depression and it makes for a very sick outlook on life. It is as much a
> killer of the spirit as a physical illness is to the body.
Quite true. It may be that he would benefit greatly
from taking an antidepressant; Zoloft is excellent.
Is he amenable to possibly trying medication?
Kate
zep...@connectexpress.com
> > point, but it doesn't make sense medically. It's been
> > known for more than 50 years how to position patients
> > so that their lungs can drain properly. You don't
> > "allow" them to "sit up" for an hour a day; you place
> > them in one or more of a dozen prescribed positions,
> > depending on what portion of the lung is creating the
> > fluid.
> >
> > If the man were really seriously ill, he wouldn't be
> > left alone; a nurse would be there to supervise his
> > positions, to provide mechanical suction if he couldn't
> > breathe, to help him cough, etc.
> >
> >
>
> You know, Kate, I have to say I agree with you on this one. To be honest,
> although the story is quite obviously fictional, I posted it simply for
> the message.
Which I got -- but the implausibility of the whole setup
ruined the story for me.
> I didn't think about the medical details, although that should have
> registered immediately - my daughter's been an extended care nurse for
> 10 years, and she's now a DON. My father has lung disease, and I've
> had chronic bronchitis since birth. There have been many times when I've
> had to sleep sitting in a chair.
Me, too, thanks to my dad's smoking, which eventually
caused him a horrible death. (He's happy now, though,
going to college on a higher plane.)
> But what especially didn't ring true with me on this one is that the
> other man let the sick one die. I find it hard to believe that anyone
> could be so heartless and cruel. But we all know it happens. Not only
> do some people become so blinded by lust and greed that they'll allow
> their fellow man to die, but they'll often murder someone to get what they
> want.
Actually, I could relate to the other man -- at times
I've delayed doing something that I should have, and
then as every minute goes by it gets harder and harder
to speak up or to act, and then between one second and
another, it's too late. Fortunately, I never let any-
one die or be hurt, though.
> And on the other hand, the reality about the medical profession is that
> while a lot of things are known, it's not always practiced. In real
> life, there are many elderly and sick people whose pain and suffering
> could be greatly eased if if weren't for the problem of the expense.
> And then there's the problem of doctors and nurses who could really care
> less about their patients. My daughter has a heck of a time finding
> good nurses, nurses who care enough to do they very best they can for
> their patients. And the documentation needed to get rid of the bad ones
> is impossible.
Hey, where does your daughter live? I know an excellent
nurse, an ARNP, who lives in Pennsylvania and is one of
the most caring people I know. She's had a rough couple
of years -- her husband turned out to be a sociopathic
monster who ... well, never mind! Anyway, she left him
and is working hard to get her life back to the level
of success and happiness she had achieved before she met
him. She likes the work she's doing -- phone triage at
a major university medical center -- but the hours in-
volve shift changes, and she can never seem to get enough
sleep. E-mail me if your daughter has any openings, would
you, please?
> So actually, although I agree with you totally about the honesty, perhaps
> you & I both are just too idealistic.
Better that than the opposite! I try to keep it
under control ... I do, I really do.
> And the important thing is, maybe someone in the medical profession will
> read this story - a nurse, perhaps - and be inspired to pay closer
> attention to the physical needs of the patient. And other people will
> read this story, and be inspired to be more loving towards their fellow
> human beings.
We can hope! My sister was a nurse, and it seems I've
always had one in my life somewhere. I always liked
the science of medicine, but not the actual practice of
dealing with patients -- almost became a researcher but
refused to kill animals for research, so forget that.
Later,
Sharon V Comstock
Hi Kate -
I'm trying to just rush through here tonight & clean up the mess &
delete & retire early with a good book - eyeballs hurt -
It does seem that many nurses are involved in abusive
relationships, especially the really nice ones. Must be a karmic thing -
the profession, and the personal stuff.
It sounds like your friend is near Philadelphia, perhaps - I'm
sure she's nowhere near my daughter. If she wants to change jobs, I would
suggest she watch the papers, but shift changes & awful hours seem to go
with nursing. Thought my daughter would get a break when she moved into
administration, but all it meant was that in addition to nights and
weekends, she'd have a regular 8 to 4 Mon to Fri job, not to mention going
in early & working late!! She's a hands-on DON, which surprised a lot of
people who had trouble with her youth when she started - just last week
one of the floors was short so she pitched in with bathing patients.
If your friend wants to change jobs, she might look into working
for insurance companies or something - two of my cousins who are nurses
do. There's also private duty nursing, or just working for agencies.
I admire nurses - the good ones, that is. It's a job I couldn't
do. Funny, among many things I'd like to do in my next incarnation - I'd
say some type of scientific research would be fun & interesting. Genetics
is a fascinating field - both plant and animal!
Although I believe it may have been written that as Eckists we
don't have to incarnate again unless we want to, I sort of doubted that
I really would - just hoped to qualify for something better - and
eventually I learned in the teachings that yes, indeed, we can't take it
for granted. . .must continually work at learning & growing, working out
that pesky ol' karma, and being careful at not accumulating more!
HUgs,
Sharon