What about it? - Plagiarism and paraphrase assigned to Eck Masters.

[Etznab]

Example quote from beginning of the book The Key to Eckankar (Paul Twitchell writes):

"[...] Years ago when I retumed from England and went to the northwest to live in Seattle, Washington, Rebazar Tarzs spent considerable time with me in his physical body. It was a case of his manifesting suddenly in his body and giving a series of talks on ECKANKAR, which were to be related to the world. Finally, one night in late winter, he wound up the series. I have tried, as best as possible, to summarize the talks here. [... .]"

For those who want a sampling of those summarized talks, or how Eck Master's words read like words from library books, scan this thread (composed when I chose to verify and illustrate what others had been saying about plagiarism).

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!searchin/alt.religion.eckankar/legions$20of$20forms|sort:date/alt.religion.eckankar/MqPyi6nZ0vw/LeAYoH7IipIJ

[Kinpa]

That simply does NOT prove anything concerning Rebazar Tarzs!

[Henosis Sage]

That simply does NOT prove anything concerning the mating habits of moles!

But it does say a lot about Twitchell, Talbot Mundy, Rebazar Tarzs, and the saints devils and fools.

a.r.e. link from 2013 ...

This example compares Paul Twitchell's The Key to Eckankar with Mundy's book.
Talbot Mundy:
"We watched Bulah Singly" said Lewis, "on the general principle that the deliberate use of secret power over other people always -- always, mind you -- arouses appetite for more. It becomes insatiable. In that respect it's worse than drink or drugs. The greater the appetite for power, the less the respect for truth. It's a self-stimulating vice, especially deadly when rooted in experience of actual authority and aggravated by intellectual conceit.

That's the reason why so-called statesmen are such liars. It wasn't long before we uncovered Bulah Singh's little game."

[...] "Saints, devils and credulous fools are made of the same identical stuff. They all have vision. They see the same truth from different aspects.

Devils exploit stupidity. They create blinding fear that gives them power over others. It inflates the devils' feeling of importance; and it makes the fools think the devils are the only safe leaders to follow.

But the vision of saints acts, by its own nature - to use a feeble illustration - like a prism letting light into the darkness. It diffuses the material fog - the fog that blinds the best of us and makes us victims of want, and disease and crime. The vision of saints lets in affluence and magnanimity and vigor.

Naturally, the devils hate it. If they can't pervert saints' vision to their own ends, they try to destroy it."

Based on: Old Ugly Face, by Talbot Mundy (1940), p. 16

http://arthursclassicnovels.com/mundy/ugfa10.html


....... what plagiarism? what verbatim copyright infringment? what "dictation"?

Paul Twitchell & Rebazar Tarzs:

I said, "But on the other hand, the deliberate use of this secret power over other people always - always - arouses an appetite for more. It becomes insatiable. In that respect, it is worse than drugs or drink. The greater the appetite for power, the less respect for truth. It is a self-stimulating vice, especially deadly when rooted in the exercise of authority and aggravated by intellectual conceit. That is the reason why so-called statesmen can be such liars."

Rebazar Tarzs smiled. "Saints, devils and credulous fools are made of the same identical stuff. They all have vision. They see the same truth from different aspects. Devils exploit stupidity. They create blinding fear that gives them power over others, inflates the devils' feelings of importance, and makes the fools think the devils are the only safe leaders to follow. But, to use a feeble illustration, the vision of saints acts like a prism, letting Light into the darkness. It diffuses the material fog that blinds the best of men and makes them victims of want, disease and crime. The vision of saints lets in affluence, magnanimity, and vigor. Naturally, the devils hate it. If they cannot pervert the saints' vision to their own end, they try to destroy it."

Based on Rebazar Tarzs in: The Key to Eckankar, by Paul Twitchell (1968), p. 14.

http://tinyurl.com/6v7bs9m

Comments: No "Astral Library" involved here either, because Mundy's text (the earlier version - earlier than Twitchell's) gave the names of characters in his text to which the words applied (AND NOT AN "ASTRAL LIBRARY"); and Twitchell reportedly met Rebazar Tarzs over a full decade AFTER Mundy wrote his book!

[Kinpa]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


ALL of which are mere assumptions on your part!Sort of like the many copyrights you CLAIM to own, but cannot show a single shred of proof! OOPS! Someone is a liar!

[Etznab]

Years ago, I think most people generally did not suspect plagiarisms. I think they believed it was the Eck Masters speaking.

Eventually the idea that Paul Twitchell copied the writings of other people had come to be an established fact. Harold Klemp likened Paul Twitchell to what he called a "master compiler".

Now there is the fact a lot of the writings were said to reflect the words of Eckankar masters. And many of the Eckankar teachings in the books too. I think one of the questions now is "How to reconcile this with plagiarism?"

Iow. How does a record of what Eck Masters taught amount to plagiarism and copying from other writers and not referencing, or crediting their names? Is it a case of literary theft in order to animate a pseudo man-made line of teachers and masters that later turned into a non-profit religion?

Many times over the years I have asked such questions in light of information on the subject of copying and plagiarism. I think there is a good possibility that Paul Twitchell did not always tell the truth. In fact, Harold Klemp in his talks gave an example of Paul not telling the truth.

In my experience Eckists are not expected to believe things based on faith, and I have even heard it said the Eck Masters like skeptics. That it is better to have things proven by direct experience. How ironic then for people to directly experience what they believed to be words from Eck Masters alongside words from various authors not belonging to Eckankar.

Today there seems to be an ongoing argument and discussion over who created the written works. Do plagiarists create written works? Or is it more accurate to say that plagiarists copy and "steal" written works? Also there has been some discussion in a.r.e. asking what was the role of Eck Masters with regard to the copying, the paraphrase and the plagiarisms? Especially those words depicted as if coming from Eck Masters; even those words put inside quotation marks again "as if" having come from Eck Masters?

Did Paul Twitchell and Eckankar steal and appropriate the writings of other people under the "guise of" Eck Masters? This is a perfectly fair question to ask after having actually viewed the number of similar and exact passages which have been illustrated to date.

Here is another question to ask. Have Eckankar members propagated the belief that copied material was created by Eck masters instead of the authors who wrote the books in the first place? I can see how it might be good for business to market such an idea (it came from Eck Masters), but where is the proof? Iow, Why should a person take it on faith alone that Paul Twitchell always told the truth? I, for one, don't believe that he did. I don't believe that the current leader of Eckankar even believes that he did. Not if he (Harold Klemp) has seen the same type of "growing list" that I have.

O.K. so here is a fair consideration. (This is being written for anybody reading a.r.e.) Consider how I looked at information come out over the years and the way that I commented about it. About how did I respond when people did not agree with me. Probably over ten years of posts have been archived and they show that I researched information. That is, I did not take things on faith alone, but explored and researched the claims of others. Much of what I said was put in the form of queries, or questions and not blanket statements. I gave illustrations and examples, including dates. So the consideration is this. Look at how I shared my research and opinions and how I responded with those who did not agree. Put that alongside of Doug Marman, of Rich Smith, of Jasmyn, Kinpa, J.R. and others over the years.

Recently I saw that Kinpa did not agree with me on all things, and that is one thing. However, what I would draw attention to is the question of How did Kinpa choose to respond to others that did not share his same views? For those just arriving, it was just the other day that Kinpa told me I didn't have a current Eckankar membership card. He told me that! Not only did he insist on it and put it on a public discussion board, but he refused to believe what I said. Iow, he refused to believe what I said repeatedly; to the extent of compounding lies about me. (And it was not the first time he remarked about my membership.)

Fact is, I looked at the lies for months. Looked at the denial and inability for Kinpa to admit the plain truth even when put right in front of him on this discussion board. And this is what I mean by "How do others respond when they see people who don't share their views?" I have been in many discussion groups and know people from many different religions and faiths. It is nice when people can communicate decently and respectfully without attacking personally those holding different opinions and beliefs. In conversations, especially in discussions about religion and ancient history people can rely on what books and what other people say to be true. But having personally researched religion and history I know that movies, books and people don't automatically have all of the answers about everything and often entertain opinions, theories and beliefs. I observe that some people can't have a discussion and remain civil whenever other people don't agree with them, while others can. Truth is, besides words in books that Paul Twitchell and Eckankar said came from Eck Masters, I don't know of any record that would prove their existence beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't really matter what other people say and how many stories if the same cannot prove what they say; because not everybody will take things on faith alone. I don't. Not anymore. Not after what I have seen after researching Eckankar history and what Eck Masters supposedly said. Not after I have seen people act nasty and mean while at the same time acting in the role of clergy.

Imho this is time for challenging the lies and those who lie. Kinpa lied to me by remarking about my status as a member of Eckankar and writing about it on a public discussion board. It wasn't the first lie about me and I have to look at his actions and ask the question Why did he do it? Or, What was the motivation? Regardless the reason and motivation, the result is defamation and with intent to degrade my character. And so I would ask readers to consider the ways that Kinpa wrote to people who didn't agree with him and compare that with the ways that other people generally communicate; those who do it more maturely and with more respect. Consider the number of times Kinpa wrote about other people messing in their pants; wrote about other people's family and friends as if to comment about them. And I ask the question: Has Kinpa met my friends and my family? And who is he to defame them along with me? This is how people respond when others don't share their views? Attacking them personally?

I have been asked (in so many words) to prove that Rebazar Tarzs isn't real. And my answer is that I can't prove that he is real. So What about it? - Plagiarism and paraphrase assigned to Eck Masters. Who wants to research and discuss this? Better yet, Who can do it sincerely and with respect? Making up lies about people in the discussion group does not lead to civil discussions, but is a flagrant sign of disrespect. I have put up with it for months and for the most part let it go. However, Kinpa is not being fair by lying about my membership card.

What kind of person remarks about another members membership card and tells them they are not a member of Eckankar? Who does that? What kind of person does that? It's probably the most insulting thing I have ever seen in my entire time at a.r.e. Then I wonder. Is this fun and entertaining for some people?

Who shows such utter disrespect for another person to repeatedly lie to and about them in spite of the other person telling the truth? Is this how people discuss the subjects at a.r.e.? Attacking those who don't believe the same as them? Why not simply attack the information and find the truth in it? Why not sort out the fiction from the fact and preserve a more accurate account of history? Imo there is already enough pseudo man-made religion and history and that has over the long run led to wars and countless innocent deaths. I really don't think that the world needs, or wants more. So why not cooperate and find the actual truth that can be proven? and this way there will be no room for imaginations and lies? I don't think it possible if people tenaciously hold to preconceptions and unfounded beliefs. I think it's time to challenge beliefs. Time to check and verify and where people have lied then call them on it.

Yeah. Other people do come to and read a.r.e. Let them see how nasty someone can be when other people don't share their same views. Let them see a member of Eckankar insist on lying to and about me as if it were entertainment and fun for them.

[Henosis Sage]

well said, ur much "nicer" than me :)

FEDERAL DEFAMATION STATUTES

DEFAMATION: SLANDER V. LIBEL

Defamation — also called slander (for spoken or otherwise transitory statements) and libel (for written or otherwise published content) — is:

"the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image."

WHAT PLAINTIFFS MUST PROVE TO WIN A DEFAMATION LAWSUIT IN THE U.S.

To win a U.S. defamation lawsuit, the plaintiff, at the very least, must prove that the defendant:
Published or otherwise broadcast an unprivileged, false statement of fact about the plaintiff;
Caused material harm to the plaintiff by publishing or broadcasting said false statement of fact;
Acted either negligently or with actual malice;
FREE SPEECH V. DEFAMATION

In the United States, federal defamation law is closely tied to the First Amendment. As a result, federal slander and libel laws are more defendant-friendly in the U.S. than those in common law countries, like the U.K. and Canada. In short, opinion is not considered defamation in the U.S. That being said, false statements of fact that harm the reputation of an individual or business, aren't protected under Constitutional Free Speech provisions.
http://kellywarnerlaw.com/us-defamation-laws/

What does that legalese mean in plain ‘ole English?

If a room of middle school kids were my audience, I’d probably go with something like this: actual malice is when someone lies on purpose to damage another person’s reputation.


U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 181 › § 4102
28 U.S. Code § 4102 - Recognition of foreign defamation judgments
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/4102

http://www.medialaw.org/topics-page/defamation-faqs

[Kinpa]

> -----------------------------------------------------------------
I do not ever work with belief, it tends to be faulty. You do in fact lie quite often, and as for your mistakes in judgment i.e. believing that what you claim as "evidence" proves that certain figures do not in any way exist in reality, is a plain lie and an assumption. If you had any actual, direct evidence, I might reconsider those words, however you fail to see that YOU make the assumption about what Paul Twitchell intended, and what he actually meant, and at times his means of, and reasons for, placing plagiarized words into the mouths of an ECK Master, and in those cases it is YOU who has NO proof, and assumes that his assumptions are truth...

> Fact is, I looked at the lies for months. Looked at the denial and inability for Kinpa to admit the plain truth even when put right in front of him on this discussion board. And this is what I mean by "How do others respond when they see people who don't share their views?" I have been in many discussion groups and know people from many different religions and faiths. It is nice when people can communicate decently and respectfully without attacking personally those holding different opinions and beliefs. In conversations, especially in discussions about religion and ancient history people can rely on what books and what other people say to be true. But having personally researched religion and history I know that movies, books and people don't automatically have all of the answers about everything and often entertain opinions, theories and beliefs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Fact is, I looked at the lies for months. Looked at the denial and inability for Kinpa to admit the plain truth even when put right in front of him on this discussion board. "

YOU claim them to be lies, but you have never proven any such thing, and as always, I have no problem that you have your own opinion, and yet you CLAIM that I am guilty of denial and have an inability to admit a completely unproven "truth". You forget that you have never had ANY direct evidence to prove what you claim to be a "truth," and I am still waiting to see ANY evidence of this...circumstantial evidence will not do by itself, you need something to corroborate it several times over, or you need a piece of direct evidence....it is obvious to me that you have no experience in a court of law because you seem to not at all understand the way evidence works...as of yet you have put no "plain truth" in front of me, and once again, your ASSUMPTIONS do not serve as evidence anymore than they serve as "truth" and yet you continually claim that they ARE truth, and THAT is a complete lie, but I can't be blamed if neither your nor sean have enough experience to be able to discern one from the other...that's on the both of you and is what I consider to be a personal issue..

I observe that some people can't have a discussion and remain civil whenever other people don't agree with them, while others can. Truth is, besides words in books that Paul Twitchell and Eckankar said came from Eck Masters, I don't know of any record that would prove their existence beyond a reasonable doubt.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I find it funny that you are so able to judge others by what you BELIEVE is going on in their heads, but you still refuse to hold yourself up to the same standards....it was not I that threw a hissy fir 2 days ago calling names, but it WAS I who told you to go right ahead and have whatever opinion you wanted to, and that I would do the same...it is YOU that cannot stand for another to simply disagree with you, you and sean BOTH pull that on a daily basis and then come back and step upon your soapbox and try everything to appear righteous and wise, but failing completely within the same 24 hour period, which is proven by YOUR OWN WORDS! Which you BOTH then go and conveniently delete!

As for a record proving any Master's existence, I am curious why you need such a thing? It isn't at all possible if there was no record? If that is how you judge such things then I suppose you had better write off all that archaeologists have found as well as anthropologists. Mankind had no spirituality and there could have been no one among them that had any degree of spiritual experience simply because there is no written record of such being the case.....do molecules not exist simply because no caveman made art on a cave wall depicting them? I find your requirement for physical proof ludicrous, as there are a great many examples of things people today take for granted as having been real, despite there being no written record of them. And why is it that you are unwilling to hold sean to those same standards concerning his threat to rape another? He made the claim that he brought a police action against the woman and David lane, however, court records say otherwise, which proves that what he says concerning it is a lie, is made up, is false and fake, because if it weren't there WOULD definitely be a record of that! But noooo you guys just LOVE your double standards! Feel free to shout them publicly for all the world to see! I don't mind one bit..

It doesn't really matter what other people say and how many stories if the same cannot prove what they say; because not everybody will take things on faith alone. I don't. Not anymore. Not after what I have seen after researching Eckankar history and what Eck Masters supposedly said. Not after I have seen people act nasty and mean while at the same time acting in the role of clergy.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That is simply your opinion, and no one has ever told you that you had no right to having it. You're painting with an awful wide brush which denotes a certain degree of prejudice on your part concerning ECKists of any level, whether they be clergy or not. You have made no secret of it here either, there are records of your words spoken against the religion, while you at the very same time claim to be a member, a thing that you cannot prove....regardless of what I said about your membership, there is nothing you can do, I also get to have my own opinions, but you know full well that if you look at your card it says the date I gave you, you simply refuse to admit that....fine, but you have acted quite nasty yourself, so once again you are found to be holding others to a standard that you refuse to hold yourself up to....that is a prejudice, which borders on religious persecution being that this is a group for ECKists....this is where you both come in claiming that I am trying to block free and open conversation, but that is also a lie, because you BOTH endlessly proselytize any ECKists that comes here in an attempt to sway them into accepting your opinions as truths, truths that you have never actually been able to prove at all!

> Imho this is time for challenging the lies and those who lie. Kinpa lied to me by remarking about my status as a member of Eckankar and writing about it on a public discussion board. It wasn't the first lie about me and I have to look at his actions and ask the question Why did he do it? Or, What was the motivation? Regardless the reason and motivation, the result is defamation and with intent to degrade my character.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am challenging you, who lies....prove that what I said was a lie, if you cannot, then you are simply making another claim, and one that apparently has you feeling very uncomfortable for some reason....you claim i lied, prove it! Put up, or shut up! What you claim is "defamation and with intent to degrade my character" is nothing more than your opinion, and the same with sean....unless either of you has passed the bar exam and I am not aware of it? Your making these claims I can just as easily use in the same way against you, and don't even get me started on sean, he has made FAR too many anti-Semetic comments about me and others that he later deleted because he KNEW they would bite him in the ass! It is NOT a long stretch from there to prove that you both religiously persecute any ECKist that comes here....

And so I would ask readers to consider the ways that Kinpa wrote to people who didn't agree with him and compare that with the ways that other people generally communicate; those who do it more maturely and with more respect. Consider the number of times Kinpa wrote about other people messing in their pants; wrote about other people's family and friends as if to comment about them. And I ask the question: Has Kinpa met my friends and my family? And who is he to defame them along with me? This is how people respond when others don't share their views? Attacking them personally?

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There have only been three people who didn't agree with me, and I have welcomed all three of you to having your own opinions....you are no one to speak about mature communication, and respect is never owed, it must first be earned, you have failed on both accounts. Anything I have ever said about you messing your pants, is just something you'll have to learn to put up with. Do I need to ave met your friends and/or family? Not necessarily. If what I said was so untrue and ridiculous, then why are you STILL screaming at the top of your lungs about it? SOMETHING obviously bothered you quite a LOT or you wouldn't be bringing that up at all because it serves no purpose, other than to defame and degrade my character LOL....

> I have been asked (in so many words) to prove that Rebazar Tarzs isn't real. And my answer is that I can't prove that he is real. So What about it? - Plagiarism and paraphrase assigned to Eck Masters. Who wants to research and discuss this? Better yet, Who can do it sincerely and with respect? Making up lies about people in the discussion group does not lead to civil discussions, but is a flagrant sign of disrespect. I have put up with it for months and for the most part let it go. However, Kinpa is not being fair by lying about my membership card.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can't prove ANYTHING about him, however, everyone knows that not being able to prove that he IS real, does NOT prove that he is NOT real. Simple fact. Plagiarism and paraphrasing belong solely to Paul Twitchell, and that ship has sailed, it's over. Why does it never occur to you that apparently NO ONE find that subject as important as you do? Are you seeing anyone join in the conversations? Even the others that were here at one time haven't come back....is there a lineup of people wanting to discuss this with you here? This is where it begins to look very much like religious persecution yet again, but by all means, keep talking, no one has shut you up, least of all, me...and stop crying about what you have put up with for months, you sound like a person playing a tiny violin and crying "poor me" hoping to gain the sympathy of others for your emotional distress. Man up and get control of yourself! Take some responsibility for yourself, and stop blaming others for how much your life isn't going the way you want it to.

> What kind of person remarks about another members membership card and tells them they are not a member of Eckankar? Who does that? What kind of person does that? It's probably the most insulting thing I have ever seen in my entire time at a.r.e. Then I wonder. Is this fun and entertaining for some people?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One who watches your antics and finds them to be deceptive, a person who wants truth does that because you refuse to do it yourself. It's a simple thing, you've been called out for being a liar and claiming to be a member when you aren't. Scan a copy of your valid card and post a link, and as I said, I'll retract every word of it, but until that happens, I will not. If I am a liar, then prove that to me, if you will not or cannot, then you'll have no choice but to amend our own words. ALL of this works BOTH ways, for you and sean, never forget that...

> Who shows such utter disrespect for another person to repeatedly lie to and about them in spite of the other person telling the truth? Is this how people discuss the subjects at a.r.e.? Attacking those who don't believe the same as them? Why not simply attack the information and find the truth in it? Why not sort out the fiction from the fact and preserve a more accurate account of history? Imo there is already enough pseudo man-made religion and history and that has over the long run led to wars and countless innocent deaths. I really don't think that the world needs, or wants more. So why not cooperate and find the actual truth that can be proven? and this way there will be no room for imaginations and lies? I don't think it possible if people tenaciously hold to preconceptions and unfounded beliefs. I think it's time to challenge beliefs. Time to check and verify and where people have lied then call them on it.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prove the lie then and be done with it! This is nothing more than another plea for sympathy, asking others to read the plagiarisms with you so that you can proselytize and convert them. What happened to free will? The world's history and wars mean nothing, so they cannot be a motivation to be used to gain others that are willing to "cooperate" with you. Doing that is dishonest, especially when you have shown that you haven't such an easy time yourself cooperating with anyone else who might not agree with you. I haven't called you any names, but you have me, in the last 3 days too. You talk a hell of a lot, but can you walk the talk??

> Yeah. Other people do come to and read a.r.e. Let them see how nasty someone can be when other people don't share their same views. Let them see a member of Eckankar insist on lying to and about me as if it were entertainment and fun for them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a fine example of you "speaking for others" by assuming that any that read will automatically agree with you, as if there is no other option...that is where you might find something of a surprise. But I WILL recommend that everyone pay close attention to what YOU say and the way YOU react to others when a person doesn't agree with YOUR opinions, and sean is even worse on that particular thing....anyone can look and see how few of my comments have been deleted,by they also can see in my man responses to posts that you both have deleted, what the other said to me....neither or you are as pure and free of a personal agenda as you claim....

[Kinpa]

So? What are you scared of? Hire an attorney and we'll meet in court about it...thus far all either of you has done is to make threats with the intent to intimidate, but neither of you are very intimidating because you both contradict yourself every single time...I'll consider this meaningless until I've received a summons....what you are showing here shows how little you understand of law in the US LOL, but by all means, BRING IT~!!!

[Etznab]

"... regardless of what I said about your membership, there is nothing you can do, I also get to have my own opinions, but you know full well that if you look at your card it says the date I gave you, you simply refuse to admit that...."

Kinpa telling me what is the date on my Eckankar membership card? We can solve this easily enough, because the office knows the date and if you don't believe me then maybe you will believe them.

I am calling you on your lies. You wrote.

"... Anything I have ever said about you messing your pants, is just something you'll have to learn to put up with. Do I need to ave met your friends and/or family? Not necessarily. If what I said was so untrue and ridiculous, then why are you STILL screaming at the top of your lungs about it?"

No I don't have to put up with your lying, esp. about my membership status and views about the religion.

You profess the granting of liberty for people to have their own opinions. That is good. That is mature. Not everybody in Eckankar, and in other religions all share the same opinions. Esp. about questionable history, about man-made history and copied, paraphrased, plagiarized information.

Your opinion I saw about Rebazar Tarzs included:

"... You can't prove ANYTHING about him, however, everyone knows that not being able to prove that he IS real, does NOT prove that he is NOT real. Simple fact. Plagiarism and paraphrasing belong solely to Paul Twitchell, and that ship has sailed, it's over. ... ."

Everyone knows? I only see what you write about what everyone knows. I can't prove that Easter Bunny is real. Does that mean Easter Bunny is real? How about Dumbo the flying elephant? Real because someone portrayed him by cartoon images as real? Being part of a discussion also means listening to other opinions other than your own. Did you see me try to correct you about my membership info? Did you listen?

"... a simple thing, you've been called out for being a liar and claiming to be a member when you aren't. Scan a copy of your valid card and post a link, and as I said, I'll retract every word of it, but until that happens, I will not. If I am a liar, then prove that to me, if you will not or cannot, then you'll have no choice but to amend our own words. ALL of this works BOTH ways, for you and sean, never forget that... [... .]"

Already so much detail you claimed to know about my membership ... so why are you asking me if you already (according to you) know? What type of conscience, or inner guidance are you listening to? Seriously. Because to be honest it looks to me like you can't, or won't accept physical evidence. Evidently it is not enough for you to see me spell out the truth repeatedly, because you just insist on denying it.

How will you apologize for being wrong about my Eckankar membership and lying about it repeatedly in spite of my spelling out the truth to you? Have you thought about it already how you will apologize? Because you do owe me an apology for that, Kinpa. For those lies. Like it or not, you have (so to speak) dug your own hole and will now have to fill it in before risking that your ego falls into it and gets lost.

Please go ahead and recommend that everyone pay close attention to how you answer the lie about defaming my Eckankar status. Because already you wrote as if so certain I was not a current member. That you were so certain that my card had a date on it that you knew.

You are Eckankar clergy, Kinpa? Calling me a liar? I am not Eckankar clergy, but I am calling you a liar. So see, it doesn't matter what is your name. That does not determine the truth. Not any more than assigning pseudo names to the writings of other people makes the pseudo names into real people. The truth is what matters and that is why I and others look at the quoted words of Masters and compare them with writings by other people. It's to get at the truth and of who wrote what, and when. If you don't like it then choose a new topic for discussion. Maybe something other than what is (according to you) in people's pants.

[Kinpa]

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then why have you NOT proceeded with this then? It seems fairly simple, especially if you are right and I am wrong....I think you protest a bit much...

> I am calling you on your lies. You wrote.
>
> "... Anything I have ever said about you messing your pants, is just something you'll have to learn to put up with. Do I need to ave met your friends and/or family? Not necessarily. If what I said was so untrue and ridiculous, then why are you STILL screaming at the top of your lungs about it?"
>
> No I don't have to put up with your lying, esp. about my membership status and views about the religion.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fair enough, so prove what I said wrong then, okay?

> You profess the granting of liberty for people to have their own opinions. That is good. That is mature. Not everybody in Eckankar, and in other religions all share the same opinions. Esp. about questionable history, about man-made history and copied, paraphrased, plagiarized information.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And there are quite a large number that STILL disagree with your opinions, all the while knowing full well about the plagiarisms...you demand that I send people here to tell you this, however, they have decided they don't want to, and that is both their right and their choice, if you don't like it or believe that, that is a personal issue as far as I'm concerned....it is reasonably fair for one to NEVER assume that everyone else will agree with them, but you have done exactly that!

> Your opinion I saw about Rebazar Tarzs included:
>
> "... You can't prove ANYTHING about him, however, everyone knows that not being able to prove that he IS real, does NOT prove that he is NOT real. Simple fact. Plagiarism and paraphrasing belong solely to Paul Twitchell, and that ship has sailed, it's over. ... ."
>
> Everyone knows? I only see what you write about what everyone knows. I can't prove that Easter Bunny is real. Does that mean Easter Bunny is real? How about Dumbo the flying elephant? Real because someone portrayed him by cartoon images as real? Being part of a discussion also means listening to other opinions other than your own. Did you see me try to correct you about my membership info? Did you listen?

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have never claimed anything about the easter bunny, why on earth would you mention that in this discussion? I also have never asked you to believe or accept that ANY ECK Master is real, but you bail out of proving what you say by asking me to prove the opposite...one can't prove a negative, remember? Oh yes,that's right...you love to use a double standard for things like that rather than actually answering MY questions...that seems rather convenient for you to avoid proving what you claim to be truth....cartoon characters have nothing to do with this conversation in my opinion, if you equate the Masters with being fictional, that rather flies in the face of your claim to be a current ECKist, especially since you can't even prove that as being an actual fact rather than simply your own assumption...as for listening to other's opinions, I WOULD, except that you have NO NEW OPINION! NO NEW EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM EITHER! Make with the direct evidence and stop with the repeats of the SAME old opinions! NO ONE wants to hear you repeat the same CLAIMS that you can't prove! And STOP claiming things to be factual when are unable to show any evidence of that!

> "... a simple thing, you've been called out for being a liar and claiming to be a member when you aren't. Scan a copy of your valid card and post a link, and as I said, I'll retract every word of it, but until that happens, I will not. If I am a liar, then prove that to me, if you will not or cannot, then you'll have no choice but to amend our own words. ALL of this works BOTH ways, for you and sean, never forget that... [... .]"
>

> Already so much detail you claimed to know about my membership ... so why are you asking me if you already (according to you) know? What type of conscience, or inner guidance are you listening to? Seriously. Because to be honest it looks to me like you can't, or won't accept physical evidence. Evidently it is not enough for you to see me spell out the truth repeatedly, because you just insist on denying it.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have a very good reason for doing so, primarily because you claim otherwise and call me a liar, without ever proving any part of it...why WOULDN'T I ask if I already knew? Are you serious? I consider that a very easy thing to see, why I ask that! It is no concern of yours what kind of conscience I listen to,or do not listen to....worry about the one that YOU listen to! How it looks to you is fine, I care very little about what you perceive, only you are responsible for that. You CLAIM I can't or won;t accept physical evidence of a thing, but which thing specifically are you speaking about? I have yet to see any physical evidence of any relevant thing! Plagiarizm, in case you weren't aware of it, is NOT physical evidence that ANY ECK Master does not exist! That is physical evidence that Paul Twitchell plagiarized, and it proves not one other thing! At least not without a verifiable spoken or written word by Twitchell himself, saying that he created fictional Masters, nothing less than that will do! Your CLAIMING that it does prove that will never make THAT true! Right back at you there buddy! Apply the standards you expect me to live by to yourself for a change, NO DOUBLE STANDARD! Your doing this only makes you look ever more foolish....but that is just MY opinion...

> How will you apologize for being wrong about my Eckankar membership and lying about it repeatedly in spite of my spelling out the truth to you? Have you thought about it already how you will apologize? Because you do owe me an apology for that, Kinpa. For those lies. Like it or not, you have (so to speak) dug your own hole and will now have to fill it in before risking that your ego falls into it and gets lost.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have no reason to think about it,you have yet to prove your claim true, when and IF that happens, I will address that, the idea causes me no trouble. As of yet I owe you not one thing, and because your opinion says I do, will never make that the case, get over yourself already! The way I see it, you and sean both have dug yourselves a hole, and I will remain here awaiting your throwing me into the hole that I supposedly dug for myself....make with the action and STOP making empty threats! All talk and no walk makes "Jack" a very dull boy...and you might consider what your own ego is doing to you rather than worry about mine, but that's just a suggestion...

> Please go ahead and recommend that everyone pay close attention to how you answer the lie about defaming my Eckankar status. Because already you wrote as if so certain I was not a current member. That you were so certain that my card had a date on it that you knew.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First I will point out that you CLAIM I lied and defamed your Eckankar status, however, you have yet to show ANY evidence to support that CLAIM! I wonder why you are so scared to show evidence??

> You are Eckankar clergy, Kinpa? Calling me a liar? I am not Eckankar clergy, but I am calling you a liar. So see, it doesn't matter what is your name. That does not determine the truth. Not any more than assigning pseudo names to the writings of other people makes the pseudo names into real people. The truth is what matters and that is why I and others look at the quoted words of Masters and compare them with writings by other people. It's to get at the truth and of who wrote what, and when. If you don't like it then choose a new topic for discussion. Maybe something other than what is (according to you) in people's pants.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have never claimed to be clergy anywhere here, but I DID call you a liar, yes. You have called me far more than just a liar, as has sean....and BOTH of you repeatedly make threats, none of which have ever been followed through....and what does my name have to do with determining truth? I have never claimed that it did! Are you THAT desperate that you talk nonsense now? The "quoted" words of Masters is a thing I consider unimportant, and many feel the very same way about that because I speak to them daily. What you choose to believe on that issue makes no difference to me, have the opinion you want to have, BUT, if you are going to claim that is a lie, you had better show some evidence!

You can compare quotes from Masters to other's books all you want to, but that will never change the fact that you CHOOSE to keep kicking a dead horse! And what's more you INSIST that everyone else should find it as important as YOU do! YOU choose another topic, because you have NO right to subject ANYONE to the constant BS you shovel out, and that last time I checked, Eckankar IS in the name of this group, and you have provably acted out persecution of others! You BOTH like to throw accusations at others, well now I am returning fire...an ECKist DOES have the right to come here and not have to listen to what you say or claim, just as you ARE free to have whatever opinion you want to, however, when you make certain statements, you wander into an area that the law will NOT support you in! As for m being an ECK clergy or not? Why don't you take that up with headquarters when you write them to complain about me....until that happens, you have nothing of import to say here...again, NOTICE how FEW people are rushing in here to side with you! Ever wonder why that is? It is NOT because Eckankar is hiding anything, anyone that does a web-search of Eckankar will undoubtedly come across all sorts of information regarding plagiarisms, it is not nearly as hidden and secret as you both CLAIM! Both of you like to hear each other speak apparently, because you certainly claim a LOT of things that you cannot prove.

[Kinpa]

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:15:07 PM UTC, Etznab wrote:

Any/all plagiarisms are wholly irrelevant until sean admits that he plagiarized an individual's copyrighted work! Until he does this, he himself causes the entire notion to be useless to look at or think about. Anyone who has a different opinion advocates deception.

[Etznab]

That doesn't prove anything concerning Rebazar Tarzs ... According to Kinpa? Is this because "that" Rebazar Tarzs doesn't exist?

Maybe have another look.

Examples:

Talbot Mundy:

Death pursues life. Is there anything without its opposite? Or any cause without its consequence? Or any light that casts no shadow? So, I tell you that your very inmost thoughts awaken hosts that otherwise had slept, as sound awakens echoes. Therefore it is neither miracle nor mystery that there is no escape from spies nor any safety other than an upright zeal that makes haste, leaving the spies forever a march behind.

This is the so-called mystery of leadership. - From The Book Of Sayings Of Tsiang Samdup

Talbot Mundy, The Devil's Guard, 1926

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300661.txt

Rebazar Tarzs:

There is a verse in the book of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad, the Way of The Eternal, which is the ancient scripture of the ECKANKAR, that goes like this, "Death pursues life. Is there anything without its opposite? Or any cause without its consequence? Or any light that casts no shadow?"
It is known that your very innermost thoughts awaken hosts that have slept, as sound awakens echoes.
This is the so-called mystery of leadership! [... .]

[Based on: 1969 Lancer Book version of The Tiger's Fang, p. 149

Another example (from a later revision):

There is a verse in the book of the Shariyat Ki Sugmad, the Way of The Eternal, which is the ancient scripture of the Eckankar, that goes like this, "Death pursues life. Is there anything without its opposite? Or any cause without its consequence? Or any light that casts no shadow?"
So it's known known that your very innermost thoughts awaken hosts that have slept, as sound awakens echoes. Therefore it is neither miracle nor mystery that there is no escape from the spires nor safety other than as upright zeal, leaving these hosts forever behind.

This is the so-called mystery of leadership!" [... .]

From 8th Printing - 1979 IWP version of The Tiger's Fang, p. 149

Comments: Mundy's version has the word spies where Eckankar's version (1979) has spires.

***

This next example compares Paul Twitchell's The Key to Eckankar with Mundy's book.

Talbot Mundy:

"We watched Bulah Singly" said Lewis, "on the general principle that the deliberate use of secret power over other people always - always, mind you - arouses appetite for more. It becomes insatiable. In that respect it's worse than drink or drugs. The greater the appetite for power, the less the respect for truth. It's a self-stimulating vice, especially deadly when rooted in experience of actual authority and aggravated by intellectual conceit. That's the reason why so-called statesmen are such liars. It wasn't long before we uncovered Bulah Singh's little game."

[...] "Saints, devils and credulous fools are made of the same identical stuff. They all have vision. They see the same truth from different aspects. Devils exploit stupidity. They create blinding fear that gives them power over others. It inflates the devils' feeling of importance; and it makes the fools think the devils are the only safe leaders to follow. But the vision of saints acts, by its own nature - to use a feeble illustration - like a prism letting light into the darkness. It diffuses the material fog - the fog that blinds the best of us and makes us victims of want, and disease and crime. The vision of saints lets in affluence and magnanimity and vigor. Naturally, the devils hate it. If they can't pervert saints' vision to their own ends, they try to destroy it."

Based on: Old Ugly Face, by Talbot Mundy (1940), p. 16

http://arthursclassicnovels.com/mundy/ugfa10.html

Paul Twitchell & Rebazar Tarzs:

I said, "But on the other hand, the deliberate use of this secret power over other people always - always - arouses an appetite for more. It becomes insatiable. In that respect, it is worse than drugs or drink. The greater the appetite for power, the less respect for truth. It is a self-stimulating vice, especially deadly when rooted in the exercise of authority and aggravated by intellectual conceit. That is the reason why so-called statesmen can be such liars."

Rebazar Tarzs smiled. "Saints, devils and credulous fools are made of the same identical stuff. They all have vision. They see the same truth from different aspects. Devils exploit stupidity. They create blinding fear that gives them power over others, inflates the devils' feelings of importance, and makes the fools think the devils are the only safe leaders to follow. But, to use a feeble illustration, the vision of saints acts like a prism, letting Light into the darkness. It diffuses the material fog that blinds the best of men and makes them victims of want, disease and crime. The vision of saints lets in affluence, magnanimity, and vigor. Naturally, the devils hate it. If they cannot pervert the saints' vision to their own end, they try to destroy it."

Based on Rebazar Tarzs in: The Key to Eckankar, by Paul Twitchell (1968), p. 14.

http://tinyurl.com/6v7bs9m

***

An argument was made that plagiarized words didn't necessarily belong to the authors who wrote them, but that the concepts were far older ... as if they really might have come from the Eck Masters. This type of reasoning - imho - attempts to circumvent, or turn around the problem of plagiarism; as if Paul and Eckankar did not plagiarize so may author's books, but that the authors and books plagiarized (the material from) came from Eck Masters.

I think it amazing the lengths people will go to defend what they were taught and subsequently believed; and literally even. In spite of evidence and modern discoveries it seems as if people are loathe to believe "outside the box".

Take the example of water on Mars; as if having ever existed there. How long did it take for people to accept the idea? And about life on other planets? Why is it the consensus appears to favor no proof of life on other planets? With all the technology and the size of the universe ... Why only life on Earth so far? Could it be that life on other planets doesn't jive with the Holy Bible? With the Old Testament part subscribed to by at least three different faiths having numbers together in the millions? or billions?

What happens when life is proven to exist on other planets? If life is found to have originated on other planets and subsequently come to Earth? So many people would then need to edit (correct) their thinking, imagination and beliefs?

Today there are laws to ban the labeling of GMO crops and proponents claim they are safe. Are they really? Safe like leaded gasoline? DDT and asbestos were once considered safe?

Imo lies can hurt people and lies can kill people when the lies trick people into avoiding the truth.

In St. Louis at this point in time there are substances in landfills people are not even sure what they are, or how much. In a recent T.V. program I learned that in 1969 only about five percent of water in St. Louis went to a water treatment plant. (Was that sewer water flowing into the river instead?) And now at the present time billions of dollars are talked about to meet the requirements for proper storm water drainage, including the planting of special gardens. I read the stories every month with people stating what is the case with landfills on fire and radioactive waste under ground and / or in the water. How much of the information is fiction vs. fact? There have been other stories in St. Louis as well, where stories differed according to the person asked. In spite of that, How to determine the actual truth? By having other people tell it to you without any attempt at verification on your own?

***

Truth be told, I went and looked at the words claimed to come from Eck Masters and compared it with the alleged copied from and plagiarized books. I looked at not only Doug Marman's and other writings, but also those of David Lane and Ford Johnson, etc. I looked at the allegations and compared the texts.

Imo, there is more than plagiarism. Imo there is altering of other people's writings and creation of so many fictions. Imho it's time to look at those fictions and discourage the creation of (and taking literally of, to the extent of persecuting others who don't) more pseudo man-made history / religion. I wish it were not this way and that decisions by other people had not been made. However, I have little choice but to follow where the evidence leads in spite of my preconceptions, prejudices, beliefs and imaginations to the contrary; or those of other people trying to have me look away from the truth.

[Etznab]

Nice try at detracting from the subject. But no cigar :)

[Etznab]

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 10:01:18 AM UTC-5, Kinpa wrote:

"... however you fail to see that YOU make the assumption about what Paul Twitchell intended, and what he actually meant, and at times his means of, and reasons for, placing plagiarized words into the mouths of an ECK Master, and in those cases it is YOU who has NO proof, and assumes that his assumptions are truth... ."

Tell us all about it then. And don't forget to show proof!

[Etznab]

I think this a perfect example of how to fail at being an Eckankar apologist.

"... Any/all plagiarisms are wholly irrelevant until sean admits that he plagiarized an individual's copyrighted work! Until he does this, he himself causes the entire notion to be useless to look at or think about. Anyone who has a different opinion advocates deception. ... ."

[Henosis Sage]

I admitted that "plagiarism". Not that it should matter because it was SO
OBVIOUS to anyone with a modicum of basic human intelligence.

NO ONE needs to have a "court order" established to work out where someone
has obviously Plagiarised another person's text ... verbatim examples is
usually enough.

Enough for a "reasonable person" that is. Not for a "fanatic".

So given I have formally admitted plagiarism, now what? The Plagiarisms by
Twitchell are "relevant again" I assume? :-)

[Henosis Sage]

" ... what Paul Twitchell intended, and what he actually meant, ..."

I'm all ears! :-)

[honeyba...@gmail.com]

You must remember: There are only so many words. Eventually, given sufficient time, ALL combinations of words will eventually be used up. That's when repetition becomes necessary, indeed, unavoidable and inevitable. The Master Ruby Squantz once indicated in a transmission that the Masters are already aware of this predicament, and are determined to prepare humanity for future necessary word incidence occurrences, by seeding various texts with words and phrases already used by past Masters. There are only so many ways the Truth can be expressed.

lol, just kidding :)

[Etznab]

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 10:01:18 AM UTC-5, Kinpa wrote:

"[...] anyone can look and see how few of my comments have been deleted [... .]"

[Kinpa]

That proves plagiarism and not one other thing. The rest you are ASSUMING, but that is NOT proof! Try again!