The problem with the teachings of eckankar (as with all forms of
spiritual materialism - here I am sure that there are eckists who go
deeper than their teaching) is that it tries to reverse the purpose of
spirituality in the name of spirituality, in the sense of simply
substituting one set of fixed views with another and now trying to
harden and confirm THAT through experience, thus putting spiritual
techniques in service of ego, which basically doesn't care which view
is hardened, if it just hardens so it can serve clinging to.
The most potent remedy for fixed views is reality, one aspect of which
is communication: exchange of energy, information, speech, warmth
between "I" and "you", "I" and "that", "I" and "other". The healing is
as hard as the walls of views are emotionally clung to.
The society of eckist (as all sectarian ones), is notorious for being
particularly afraid of communicating about their innermost views in a
rational fashion without getting confirmation, and their fear is
usually covered with a crust of arrogance and a feeling of
superiority: the other is so negative. Why is this so ?
It is mainly because eckankar systematically schools the follower to
be dependent on the person of the living eck master and his
organization as the only "reliable" source of information and to
suppress a mature and less naively subjectivistic view on his own
experiences, with suggestions of severe repercussions and spiritual
loss in case he acts otherwise. There is the clear intention to
isolate the student mentally from non-eckists and make him completely
unreachable through any rational approach. The following quotes give a
first impression of this, and they are testimony of how the electric
fence around an eckist's Nibelungen treasure is made thicker and
thicker, preventing communication and openness.
I also listed a few quotes that the dependence is not only on some
universal spiritual principle (as some would have it), but explicitly
on the "Living ECK Master", who is the leading personality of the
eckankar organization, and his teachings.
I'd like to remark here, that it is for this reason that I ask serious discussion with me to be directed to email only, as much as possible. (Note - this no longer applies. Gunnar is "retired" and not really interested anymore and spends his time on life now. I will try to delete all email addresses in this document - since they're not active anyway. -- svc) I feel I have done more than my share of trying to reach eckists who act reasonably up to a certain critical point, when all of a sudden they make a jump, ignoring everything we had talked before or what the deal was all about. Of course, we all make these mistakes, but I find that often people refuse to admit it at that point, which makes the discussion repetitive and a waste of energy. Eckists even feel justified to do so, and here are the reasons why:
"[...] the arguments of the intellect of man. Since the intellect is that which makes up the universal mind power, it is nothing more than the essence of the Kal Niranjan, king of the negative worlds." --- PT, Satsang II, L. 4
"One should learn to forget receiving knowledge from any outside source, but always try to fin it through the inner means, that is direct communication from the MAHANTA, the Living ECK Master."--- PT, Satsang II, L. 5
"There is no way that he can leave ECK. He might believe that it is possible, but the belief is false, for it is only wandering astray and refusing to face the responsibility of what is truly the SUGMAD's own, and ITS true representative in the world of worlds." --- PT, Satsang II, L. 5
"It's only that the chela is allowing the Living ECK Master to use him as a divine channel." --- PT, Satsang II, L. 6
"He asks that we only be faithful to the spiritual excercises of ECK, and drop all other studies. Then he takes charge to help us pass through the dangerous areas of the psychic world where dwells the Kal power ready to hold us in its traps." --- PT, The Precepts of ECKANKAR, L. 8
"So it is found that unless the chela gives himself up to the MAHANTA, the Living ECK Master, that he will have problems. He will suffer unnecessarily, brought on by his own actions and deeds [...]" --- PT, Satsang II, L. 4
"He is liable to become a suicide or a mentally ill person who ends up in some institute. This is the greatest problem which one has to face during his stride towards perfection of Soul. He has to surrender himself to the MAHANTA, the Living ECK Master, or take the chance of ending up in these conditions." --- PT, Satsang II, L. 11
!->
"This is the difference between the chela who is naive and the one with experience: the ability to see that once the Living ECK Master has appeared to him, he must accept this as his reality [...] If he doubts, then trouble arises [...] He must be absolutely sure of what is going on within himself and never once question the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master, whether the experience is true or not." --- PT, Satsang III, L. 1
<- !
"The chela must be a person of heroic spirit and mold in order to carry out the responsibilities of being a divine instrument for the MAHANTA [...] He must rely on his heroic spirit to triumph over all the attacks made upon him by the Kal force through others [...] the chela carries on a strategy of contradictions which will become powerful in his hands [...]" --- PT, Satsang II, L. 6
No wonder then that...
"He is the lonely one simply because there is hardly anyone here in the flesh who can hold a communication with him. His only recourse is to depend entirely on God" --- PT, Satsang II, L. 12
-----------------------
Paul Johnson, participator in ARE, has a healthier approach to offer:
"The last time I studied social psychology was over 20 years ago, so my recall may be faulty. But one concept that I think applies very well to ARE is cognitive dissonance. This occurs when we become uncomfortable due to the perceived incompatibility of two pieces of knowledge. E.g. "O.J. Simpson is a hero and role model" but "O.J. Simpson is a wife-beater, stalker, and probably double murderer." There are several ways of dealing with these conflicts.
"The most primitive is simple denial: he can't possibly be a murderer. But more sophisticated is what Gurdjieff calls buffers. These enable us to compartmentalize uncomfortably conflicting information so that there is no friction.
"What I see happening in ARE regarding David Lane raises interesting questions about cognitive dissonance. People are dealing with "Eckankar is my chosen spiritual path from which I have derived great benefit" and "Eckankar is an ersatz conglomeration put together by a con-man and attributed to fictional sources." The most primitive response would be to just deny the second half, but this kind of suppression isn't always easy. [...]
"As for buffers, I see the same theme both in Holly and in Mark Summers [participators on ARE]-- "Yes, but..." Admit the accuracy of Lane's research, but then deny that it matters because a) Lane is biased and even if his facts are right his attitude is bad (Mark) or b) intellectuals and scholars in general are to be disdained as incapable of grasping real spirituality (Holly).
"What I would recommend as a growth experience is to try to get rid of the buffers and rub those uncomfortably conflicting realities up against each other and see what illumination results from the sparks. My whole life has been changed by being the first Theosophist to do this in a serious way on the subject of the Masters: a) HPB wrote some of the most inspiring, informative books on occult philosophy ever written, and clearly had a great deal of genuine knowledge and b) the stories she told about where she obtained her information were largely fictional and often preposterous.
FEAR AND NEGATIVE PROGRAMS IN ECKANKAR
The most important psychic technique that the "eck masters" employ is the tension of fear and hope, of reward and punishment. Fear of an almost irrepairable mistake through opposing the leader's views, and hope for a relatively easy way to spiritual freedom through the initiations as acknowledged by the leader's organization. I didn't go to length as to the promises of salvation through initiation, but the interested reader will find the Sharyiat-Ki-Sugmad (which the "eck masters" call "the Bible of eck") full of statements saying that after initiation the liberation process turns into some kind of automatism which one simply goes along with by stubborn loyalty to the leader. It is even compared to an elevator which takes one to the absolute like a surfer rides a wave. Here, I just quote a statement on the second initiation. The fifth initiation, analogously, promises the eckist's permanent freedom from reincarnation anywhere in the realm of rebirth, not just in coarse matter.
"The second Initiation is the complete linkup with the ECK that the individual has looked for in many previous lives. It means that he will finish out his karma in this lifetime and never return to this world unless he desires it, or the SUGMAD has him return for some mission of service."So now we know what is supposedly at stake.
HK, Soul Travel 2, L. 7What of him who stays in eck unhappily ? In Satsang III, L. 6, Klemp consoles him thus:
"he is a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief"but nevertheless"he is much better off in his spiritual life than is one whom the Kal has convinced to leave ECK"Why ? Twitchell teaches in The Sharyiat-Ki-Sugmad, part one, Chapter 6 of the so-called "Bible of eck":
"[...] to question is to defeat one's own purpose with God [...] To ridicule, to scorn, to speak mockingly of the Mahanta, and not to have faith in him and the cause of ECK is to bring woes to the advocator of doubt. It brings his karmic process to a halt, increases his incarnations in this world, and causes him to suffer untold hardships. The ignorant and the naive will never understand, nor shall they learn except by experiencing the slow death brought about by their own overt acts against the Mahanta and the ECK."But Twitchell becomes more concrete in Satsang III. Klemp points to Twitchell in letter 6 of that series:
"Paul had a special purpose in mind when he wrote the third series of the Satsang discourses. They were written especially for the advanced chelas in ECK, and the original title before" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^[not as a motivating factor for beginners as some would have it]
"he changed it was 'Paul's Letters to His Chelas.' The series was to be most enlightening because in it he could talk to us about the things dearest to his heart, things that would mean nothing to anyone outside of ECK - and if they were said outside of ECK, the messages would be upsetting because of the unformed state of consciousness there.
The public has no feeling for the secret teachings of ECK [...]"
So we can be sure that Twitchell's words are endorsed by Klemp, just
not meant for the public. They are not really that hard to understand,
but for an "unformed", unwashed brain, it's naturally upsetting.
"Go back through the first five discourses which he wrote, and read them with care."Alright, we will certainly do so:
"[...] I want to go into the overt acts which some chelas, and many outside ECK, are apt to commit at times against the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master [...] There are some who have unwittingly and ignorantly said vicious things about him [...]Since the eck as universal spiritual principle is hardly a group which one can break off from to join another, this obviously means 'break off from eckankar', the organized path on earth. Other interpretations are clearly nonsensical here.Anyone who breaks away from ECK after receiving initiation into ECK, especially when given by the Mahanta, will have to go through many future lifes until he meets the ECK Master again, accepts him as the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master, and surrenders completely to him. He punished himself [...] for the ECK, which steps in and begins to work out the destiny of that individual who has taken steps to create overt acts against the Master, or if he does any of the things as given above. Those [...] soon find themselves in certain circumstances which only add to their troubles in life. The ECK ceases to operate in their lives, for one thing [...]
If ECK [...] ceases to function in that individual who has created the heavy overt acts against the ECK, that individual becomes like a vegetable. This is a simile for one without vitality in his actions and deeds, whose thinking is dulled and who is not mentally alert at all. In other words, he is like an inanimate element of life, a vegetable, a piece of mineral, a rock, or something with hardly any emotions and thinking ability left [...]
This also occurs if one should have the initiation in ECKANKAR and break off to join another group, regardless ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ of whether it is a psychic, religious, or philosophical organization."
But what if (as in most every case in real life :) none of this happens to the defector ? Well, then the eckankar standard excuse no. 1 applies:
"It may not appear so in this particular individual's outer life, but it is working inwardly."But Klemp - surely not because he holds this to be an unimportant part of the eck teachings - not only endorses Twitchell's negative programs with agreement and directs his students in letter 6 to read them a second time, but uses his own old-testamentarian style to pound the same message home a third and fourth time within one year of study:
"This is the very problem that haunts some people you run into every day: They met the Master once in another time but stormed angrily from his presence. In this lifetime, the Kal may have blessed them with wealth and possessions,"Maybe I should've demanded a raise :/ "but only to keep the Spiritual Eye shut to the memory of the magnificence they once dwelled in. Good karma must be laboriously built up before they can again meet the Ancient One [...] They can sense the past in a sorrow way, of when they stood in the circle of the Mahanta's compassion,"Very important: the Mahanta's compassion is not unlimited, as opposed to that of a truly enlightened being.
"but this life gives its payment to them in futile emptiness. They are the shadow walkers."HK, Satsang III, L. 6
Common justifications for fear causing statements"Initiates who have been followers of ECK for many years suddenly come to the fork in the road where they are at a loss to decide their future course. They use clever explanations to the Living ECK Master, saying that he misreads their true motives [...] But the ECK waits and watches for the disobedient chela to catch himself before a complete fall from grace deposits him on a lower spiritual rung than the place he started in ECK in this lifetime [...]
The negative power may create so much doubt in a chela that he leaves the Master. Doubts gather in his mind about the intentions of the Mahanta, and the chela storms off in a huff. But the Master is the lord of all worlds and knows that the chela's seperation is of his own doing and that in some lifetime he will return to the ECK again, but only after a severe apprenticeship in the dark jungles of the Kal [...] The wrath of the ECK crashes down upon anybody who is still a slave to the ego and deserts the Master [...]
Not once will he see the connection between his betrayal of the ECK and the horrendous troubles that strike him like a plague on every hand. And thus, he goes downward on the spiral of awareness until he leaves this body in hopeless despair, still wondering why the fates have treated him so cruelly."
HK, Satsang III, L. 8
-------------------------------------------------
"A lot of the material in the early Eck writings was borrowed from other paths and traditions. The bulk of it appears to come from Radha Soami and the dire and fearsome predictions seem to come from that particular culture. "Many of the threats were altered and only make sense within this culture and with the eck organization as created by Paul Twitchell. This shows that Paul Twitchell's use of them was intentional and not out of reverence to an unchanged old tradition. The problems rooted in a slack in spiritual discipline and trust in the master described in the Radha Soami tradition are now interpreted as coming from leaving a physical organization. So there is a severe difference, along with the question whether the Radha Soami approach in itself has been the wisest to begin with.Moreover, in a country like India, the uneducated people still tend to think like children. Until recently, the population of India was never exposed to the scientific and critical thinking that has flooded the West ever since the age of "enlightenment". This power of critical, de-mystified thinking has been released in the psyche of Westerners, and now we have to deal with it, we have to integrate it. If an aspect of the psyche - no matter if we consider it good or bad - has been released, we cannot ignore it as if it had never been addressed. Of course, we dream of doing so because we want to go back to sleep. So one cannot approach Western people - who also get to hear other sides of reality - with this aspect of Indian culture without doing severe damage because of getting followers in a double bind situation which people in India had not been in danger of getting into in former centuries.
"It might be considered absolutely necessary to provide at least some form of warning of the consequences of certain actions."The severity of the consequences should be somehow connected with the severity of the actions and the motives behind them. Here, however, we are confronted with disastrous effects for something as harmless as leaving eckankar for any reason, including the honest reason that one does not think it is a suitable path (see "Fear and Negative Programs in Eckankar"). What kind of karma would this be that severely punishes an action coming from a spiritually pure intention, just because the chela could've taken the wrong guess (even if we were to accept the laughable claim - that the "eck masters" are actually be the only true spiritual masters on earth - as true) in a matter that he cannot know about unless he would already be fully enlightened ?
"That element is not so much incorporated in the Eck works as an assist to spiritual unfoldment but more as a comfortable transition zone for those who need that active element of fear in order to even be interested in investigating a new religion. The chela then goes on to grow with the more positive elements in the teachings, eventually leaving the negative elements behind as mere words on paper, then ultimately realizing it's proper place amongst the whole."If this were the case, then the threats should concern non-practice, not leaving the organization. Also, the threats would be served the newcomer in eck in the beginning. As it is, however, the most severe statements are only sent to a member that has already studied eckankar for over seven or more years."The fear statements are being removed from the eck teachings, and are offset by statements saying the opposite"This doesn't explain what state of mind caused them to be there in the first place. Secondly, this is highly doubtful. So far, the fear tactics are still an integral part of the eck discourses. Also, Harold Klemp knows that people function emotionally and towards safety. If there are two statements about the consequences of leaving eck, one for the public, saying you're free, one more esoteric (and Klemp says so in his introduction to Satsang III - namely that here Twitchell could do heart to heart talk with his close chelas and tell them things that the public would reject), saying that you're in for it if you leave, then people knowing both statements will choose safety out of fear of the second statement. Moreover, they will deem themselves in the "inner circle" for doing so, unconsciously now trying to excert the same subtle fear control over others under the guise of an esoteric secret. This dynamic happens all the time in eck, and it is what keeps the movement together.
"This criticism is so negative and respectless"One engages oneself in a critical way with another's opinions because he respects the other. A discusses things with B and tests his arguments for truth because he respects B's inborn intelligence which is capable of letting go of opinions which turn out to be false in the light of testing. It is understandable that emotional people feel that respect means saying yes, even if B uses laughable arguments below his own level of intelligence for the sake of defending a belief. That is a sectarian attitude which belongs in the churches related to that belief but not in a discussion forum. If A turns against such an attitude, B can't use this to claim A does not respect him.
As Paul Johnson, a participator in ARE and author of a critical analysis of his own spiritual community, the Theosophical Society, put it in one of his articles:
"What do we mean by negative? An Eckist [...] would say that any statement critical of Eckankar is negative. An ex-Eckist might retort that the fear of truth expressed by this attitude is the real negativity.[...] a certain mailing list in favor of eckankar] is a refuge for people who want to escape the "negativity" of this newsgroup. But is it not perhaps a certain kind of positivity they seek to evade? Positive values like openminded investigation, objective consideration of evidence, and hope of enlightenment and liberation attained through fearless truthseeking?
In fact, "you're negative, I'm positive" is little more than a tautology. Whenever we are positive about something, anyone opposing our view appears negative. Obviously, it looks the opposite from our opponent's perspective. Who says Australia is on the bottom half of the planet? Only those of us on "top" who happen to make up a large majority.
[...] 100% of the really mean and hateful stuff on this newsgroup has come from the true believers. And that is harmful in many ways, not least of which to the image of Eckankar that any ignoramus like myself who stumbles into this group will acquire from observation."
Click Here for Next Part...
* * * *
