Post by Rich?
Ok, my mistake. It sounded exactly like the same sort of thing I've seen
before, trying to scare newbies away from Eckankar.
So you are another one of the fearful types that are literalists? You really
believed you were going to suffer from a curse?
What has been the results of those curse(s) so far? What have the astral
Hells been like for you?
Post by Jonathan Johns
This has nothing to do with parroting Prometheus. I figured out that
Eckankar's writings put curses on its members long before I left
Eckankar. I did not look at any of the anti-Eckankar message boards
such as ET (EckankarTruth) or ESA (Eckankar Survivors anonymous)
(Prometheus) until after I had left Eckankar.in December, 2008. I had
seen the homepage of ET, but I only saw the first five messages, and I
though there were only five messages on the entire message board. I
never saw ESA before I left Eckankar in December of 2008 So your
assertion that I am parroting Prometheus is completely wrong. I
figured ot Eckankar's curses by myself, years and years before I ever
saw any of Prometheus' post on ESA.
It was probably in the 1980s when I noticed that Paul's threats of the
astral Hells first adversely affected me. My first confirmation that
somebody else had noticed the same thing was when I read parts of Ford
Johnson's book "Confessions Of A Godseeker) sometime in the 2000-2008
time frame. But I had already figured out some of Eckankar's curses at
least ten years before I read Ford's book. Funny how I figured it out
independently of Ford Johnson. Funny how I figured it out
independently of Prometheus. I don't know whether Prometheus figured
it out independently of Ford Johnson, but I suspect that he did.
I discovered the same thing with regard to Prometheus over at ESA.
When I first started reading ESA I found out that Prometheus and I had
noticed a lot of the same things about Eckankar independently,
including Harold Klemps copying of Christianity.
"Ok, my mistake. It sounded exactly like the same
sort of thing I've seen before, trying to scare newbies
away from Eckankar."
Hey Rich, you think any "newbies" might happen to
And how about those curses? Are there any curses
to speak of in the Eckankar writings?
My, oh my. Ex-Eckists writing about any Eckankar
curses for people who leave Eckankar? OMG, it's a
And you, Rich, don't like to hear about it? Because
it might scare new people away?
Umm... this is something people dialogue about at
a.r.e. The writings of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar,
Personally speaking, I think it would be helpful that
people discover and explain why any such "curses"
were written into the works. Was it something that
Paul compiled? along with the other stuff he came
across in his life? Was it original to Paul Twitchell?
What was the context, etc? These are the type of
questions I would consider contemplating and then
researching before discussing, or dismissing them
Lots of things get put into the Eckankar writings -
including plagiarized materials from other authors.
It's not pretty to realize this for the first time, IMO,
but learning more about WHY it happened is what
can help to some extent, for some people. It gives
more of the whole truth.
Speaking about the whole truth, Doug Marman
gave a whole chapter to the subject in his book
The Whole Truth. Chapter Six:
THE MATTER OF PLAGIARISM p. 253
The Roots of Eckankar; More than Just Plagiarism;
Looking at it From Paul's Perspective; Plagiarism versus
Copyright Infringement; Another Reference Point; Journal-
ism's Disregard of Plagiarism; The Shifting Line of Ethics;
Steal Everything, then Create Something New; Engineers
Copy, then Improve; Puritanical Plagiarism; A Trip Back
Through Time; Plagiarism Is Not Universally Accepted;
Dialogue in Education; The Ethical Foundation of Plagiarism;
Plagiarism in the Age of Criticism; Paul's Own Words; Many
Sources; We Are Not Guilty; Spiritual Leadership versus
In my opinion, The Whole Truth DID include things
that were controversial. Including plagiarism. The book
did NOT dismiss the idea that Paul compiled from the
works of other people. In fact, the author mentioned a
number of sources. The author also illustrated places
where names were changed to Eck Masters. Does the
book go into the area of WHY Paul Twitchell - founder
of Ekankar - did those things? Does it give the "whole
truth" on those matters? or does it give the opinions &
speculations of so many people along with what might
be the truth? I thought it did both.
So what about the "curses" for people who leave the
path of Eckankar? I thought there were other things by
the leader of Eckankar (now) that did not amount to a
curse. Things even by the founder that did not amount
to a curse, but the idea that the Master has to let the
person go, that they don't try to "keep them" against
their will, and that the Master (in so many words) does
not wish them any ill will. Was Paul just compiling a
whole lot of stuff? from a whole lot of places? and as a
result it was natural for contradictions to appear in the
writings? Could that have been, at least, a part of the
reason? It's a very real possibility, IMO. But if people
think the whole dogma and outer writings came from
Eck Masters only, this is where I suspect people are
missing the boat and are like stranded on an island
surrounded by the whole truth.
If it were me, I would look at the books where the form
of "curses" appear. Look at the year they were printed
and compare with the earlier writings by Paul Twitchell.
Including Letters to Gail. But to be fair, I would also do
a check of the several groups that Paul Twitchell wrote
for and was affiliated with prior to Eckankar - including
Scientology - and research what were the teachings in
those other groups about people who left. I have to say
it this way, IMHO, because not everything the founder
of Eckankar illustrated and shared was original to him,
or never illustrated and shared before. To be frank, it is
common in a host of organized religions to see clergy
"curse" people who leave the church. And it is common
in organized religious dogma to read about "curses" for
people who leave.
All of this is not to state I know exactly WHY certain
things entered into the writings, dogmas, or beliefs of
others. I rather think it might take some research to
separate fact from fiction with regard to versions of the
whole truth. However, I don't think it uncommon in the
world of today, where there is generally more liberty &
freedom (compared to the Dark Ages), that people do
bring up the subject of "curses" by their former church
upon those who leave it.
What I see happening in public dialogue between the
members of a church and the former members are 2
basic things. The members painting pretty pictures of
the church, even painting over anything negative from
a former member (or anybody) who finds an issue of
controversy, contradiction, etc. On the other side of
the fence I see people critically looking at the dogma
and history of organized religion. I see researchers
turning up credible information that not even a whole
lot of people in the church knew before. Along with it
I see people who go to war over personal beliefs, and
whether those beliefs are based on actual truth or not.
It took hundreds of years for relationships between
differing religious factions to develop in the world. To
the point that today people are being killed on a daily
basis. Eckankar has existed less than half a century
since it's founding in 1965, yet already one can find
schisms and similar competing sects. If the root of
all this amounts to people arguing over what is true,
or not. If it comes down to clarifying fact from fiction
then maybe civil well-meaning dialogue and debate
would be better than feeding into World War III.