REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar

[Etznab]

1970s

In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.

"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"

[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"

The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]

In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).

The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!

Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.

[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.

This is all!"

[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]

Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.

(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)

In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.

By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!

"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."

[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]

Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what

A. Doug Marman knew

and

B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.

There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.

yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

Another reference link for that last post.

http://homeunix.nl/cgi-bin/webnews.pl?showold=true;user=googlebot;group=alt.religion.eckankar;sortorder=date;article=284894

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.

Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.

Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?

This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.

Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.

At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.

[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"

[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)

Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.

One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.

Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)

"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?

"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.

"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.

"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/kP7ml_Rh9lY/m/6CaYXfGiC4wJ

I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.

One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.

Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)

"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?

"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.

"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.

"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ

I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

Had the wrong link in that previous post, so had to delete and repost it with the correct link. The 2nd part of Marman's 4 part rationale is here.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/kP7ml_Rh9lY/m/6CaYXfGiC4wJ

I gave the link and people interested can read it on their own. I don't want to weigh down this thread with a lot of commentary and speculation now, but just give a "taste" of Marman's rationale. And for those with not a lot of time to read, I can illustrate some short quotes.

"[...] The point is not whether these beings were historical personages. The problem Lane has here is that he is trying to use the principles of Logical Deduction to judge spiritual realities. The principles of Logic, as they were established in the 18th and 19th centuries, claim that all statements are either true, false or meaningless. Clearly David is trying to fit Paul's writings into one of these three categories.

"[...] Therefore, it is possible to prove these statements for ourselves inwardly, not publicly, and this is the foundation of the teachings of ECKANKAR. So when we say that we believe this statement is true, we are talking about a truth beyond physical proofs.

"[...] The lesson here, for the spiritual student, is to become aware of the difference between what one knows through one's own personal experience, and what one has accepted on faith from outer teaching. Once you have had inner encounters with the ECK Masters or other spiritual realities, it is
important to establish within yourself whether this is a reality or not. If you cannot, you leave yourself open to the challenges of the scientists or the lawyers.

"[...] This means that, when studying the works of ECKANKAR, we should take what we find is useful and not worry about the rest. Remember, the writings of the ECK Masters are aimed at many different states of consciousness. [... .]"

Just a couple short observations and comments.

1. Marman pushes his rationale as if it were Eckankar and / or how other people should look at and understand Eckankar when, in fact, much is his personal rationale to which many people (former Eckists included) have taken issue and disagreed.

2. Marman wrote: "Remember, the writings of the ECK Masters ... ." (And that was ECK Masters, plural.) So copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing, compiling, etc. from multiple authors and their books amounts to "the writings of the ECK Masters" ? (Just one of many questions an unbiased objective observer might ask.)

BTW. Much of this I have not read before. And there was a whole lot of feedback and argument on this group following Marman's posts, to which he he didn't respond directly. Instead, he waited a week and posted another "part" of his beliefs.

I wasn't around in a.r.e. to respond at that time so I am beginning to respond now. My main observation right now is that Marman chose to push a certain narrative. One that has remained in part throughout his more than twenty years of Eckankar writings. It was there in the beginning and that personal rationale appears to color years and years of his writings. Not just writings here, but the books he has written as well.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

Had the wrong link in that previous post, so had to delete and repost it with the correct link. The 2nd part of Marman's 4 part rationale is here.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/kP7ml_Rh9lY/m/6CaYXfGiC4wJ
I gave the link and people interested can read it on their own. I don't want to weigh down this thread with a lot of commentary and speculation now, but just give a "taste" of Marman's rationale. And for those with not a lot of time to read, I can illustrate some short quotes.
"[...] The point is not whether these beings were historical personages. The problem Lane has here is that he is trying to use the principles of Logical Deduction to judge spiritual realities. The principles of Logic, as they were established in the 18th and 19th centuries, claim that all statements are either true, false or meaningless. Clearly David is trying to fit Paul's writings into one of these three categories.
"[...] Therefore, it is possible to prove these statements for ourselves inwardly, not publicly, and this is the foundation of the teachings of ECKANKAR. So when we say that we believe this statement is true, we are talking about a truth beyond physical proofs.
"[...] The lesson here, for the spiritual student, is to become aware of the difference between what one knows through one's own personal experience, and what one has accepted on faith from outer teaching. Once you have had inner encounters with the ECK Masters or other spiritual realities, it is
important to establish within yourself whether this is a reality or not. If you cannot, you leave yourself open to the challenges of the scientists or the lawyers.
"[...] This means that, when studying the works of ECKANKAR, we should take what we find is useful and not worry about the rest. Remember, the writings of the ECK Masters are aimed at many different states of consciousness. [... .]"
Just a couple short observations and comments.
1. Marman pushes his rationale as if it were Eckankar and / or how other people should look at and understand Eckankar when, in fact, much is his personal rationale to which many people (former Eckists included) have taken issue and disagreed.
2. Marman wrote: "Remember, the writings of the ECK Masters ... ." (And that was ECK Masters, plural.) So copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing, compiling, etc. from multiple authors and their books amounts to "the writings of the ECK Masters" ? (Just one of many questions an unbiased objective observer might ask.)
BTW. Much of this I have not read before. And there was a whole lot of feedback and argument on this group following Marman's posts, to which he he didn't respond directly. Instead, he waited a week and posted another "part" of his beliefs.
I wasn't around in a.r.e. to respond at that time so I am beginning to respond now. My main observation right now is that Marman chose to push a certain narrative. One that has remained in part throughout his more than twenty years of Eckankar writings. It was there in the beginning and that personal rationale appears to color years and years of his writings. Not just writings here, but the books he has written as well.

Another Doug Marman quote from 1997:

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ

Is it about copyright then vs. now? or is it about making up a fictional character called Rebazar Tarzs? Those are two different things, IMO.

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference

"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ

Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...

My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"

but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)

and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.

so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....

or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN

THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?

DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!

SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....

So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.

Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.

He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.

cheers

PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

[Maplin]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

[Etznab]

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.

And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.

In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ

There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.

And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Doug talks about how the spiritual leaders should not be criticized, or compared with their own personal lives; when that is convenient for Doug.

In other places he spares not the whip when trashing other gurus, or traditions. Like, Did you know ...? Did you know ...? Did you know ...? Etc., etc.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Ojkgn_PP-5Q/m/vjPNC0KfaDMJ

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*

It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.

SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)



AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...

WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????

WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?

WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?


PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....


"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "

FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.

WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY

IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..

THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID

one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN

"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.


The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.

PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"

IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????

WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?

I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.

MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.

so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.

"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .

in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.

but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.

while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.

in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)

Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.

Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.

That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.

but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.

Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.

For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.

cheers and (whatever)

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.

Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.

"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"

https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2

I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

Continuing with Marman quotes:

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?

"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..

aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.

childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)

regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?

O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?

Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

Came across an interesting thread with Lurk and Doug supposedly having dialogue. Example (Doug writes):

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.

"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.

"Again, thanks for listening."

Doug.

My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.

I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.

i scrolled htis post reply by LURK

he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ

EG

"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?

Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "

and

"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.

You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.


Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to

communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."

note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings

when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)

A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....

That's our Doug alright.

and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.

It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...

but what's the point of making him the issue?

the time to confront him has long past imho.

imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.

but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.

anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.

cheers

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars who are good at making things up.

I think that kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalysts for war environmental destruction and environmental collapse.

The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept the truth when right in front of their face. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.

So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today, and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and the truth known by a lot of the public.

I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much that they willingly invent them, or allows others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land are pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are true them them maybe it's they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?

In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces are battling for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. the "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and that's why I research and write about it.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)

It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.

I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.

The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.

So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.

I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?

In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.

Doug:
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?

Joe:
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "

Doug:
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"

My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.

IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.

Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.

I hadn't read many of the posts I am looking at now. I know much of Marman's later positions and writings, but are now looking at the beginnings of online messages. For example:

"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.

"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?

"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"

Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ

Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.

1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.

Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".

So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!

Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.

Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.

"to bring to mind by description"

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent

Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?

Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.

"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"

Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!

Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?

It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?

Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.

Intermission.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?

You wrote:

"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.

"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ

That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?

So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.

Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"

Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).

"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.

"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.

"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.

"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.

"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ

I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.

Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ

Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!

For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?

So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.

"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"

[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]

In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

From the same thread:

"As for the changing of the names, well Paul first offered these manuscripts to Kirpal for him to publish, to help spread the teaching under Kirpal's name. Kirpal rejected them. Paul chose to distance himself from Kirpal, rather than ride on the coattails of Sant Mat. This left Paul free to teach a number of things that are not taught within Sant Mat, and yet teach the ancient truth at the same time."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ

Again it looks to me like Doug is confirming that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction to "delete" certain other factual historical truths. IOW I now think Doug Marman knew the truth about whether R.T. was ever a real living human being. I also suspect Harold Klemp knew this too and that the two of them knew it since at least the 1980s.

Reflecting back on my time here at a.r.e. and the many queries about whether Rebazar Tarzs was real I wonder something. Why the hard time? Why the hard time by both Eckankar members and former members? And why the hell the outright denial that Rebazar Tarzs is a fictional being? Why the spinning and wiggling around the actual historical truth that certain others not only now know but have written about it at length for years?

It looks to me like Doug wanted to cancel truth, cancel factual history and replace it with what is IN HIS HEAD! And to be quite frank this scares me concerning where it could potentially go. It looks very deranged to me. It looks sick and I don't agree with Doug. And I have not been the only one to disagree. At the same time I find what Doug calls "dialogue" highly interesting and historically important. I'm studying it like a psychologist might study one of their patients to learn what "makes them tick". It's why I'm taking the time to look into Doug's positions at length.

From an historical viewpoint looking over history and sorting fact from fiction, real from fake, I can think of no greater in depth study than observing how Doug Marman, Harold Klemp, "Eckankar" and others define Rebazar Tarzs over the years. To me it is very educational, like anatomy of "How to go off with the fairies".

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

With regard to Harold and Doug talking about things.

"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"

[Based on: January 2003 Doug Marman T.S. post - Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman]

http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Yes, 1983 was about the time that Harold started going through Paul's library as well.

"Harold wanted to research it earlier, but Darwin had possession of it until 1983, when he turned it over to Harold. Harold put it all in a locked room at the ECK office.

"He began looking through what was there and would talk with me about it when we got together on a weekly basis. He then invited me to look through it as well.

"I wouldn't say I was a part of Harold's research team. In fact, there was no research team as far as I could see. Harold did his own research. He also was interested in whatever I might have discovered or what others ran into, but when it came to going through Paul's library, Harold wanted to do that himself.

[... .]"

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/gSz-OeYPFbM/Zfm_0cCWkHIJ

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/lIwAFh2S5hI/m/6pUCEiiOAgAJ

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

With regard to Harold and Doug talking about things.
"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"
[Based on: January 2003 Doug Marman T.S. post - Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman]
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Yes, 1983 was about the time that Harold started going through Paul's library as well.
"Harold wanted to research it earlier, but Darwin had possession of it until 1983, when he turned it over to Harold. Harold put it all in a locked room at the ECK office.
"He began looking through what was there and would talk with me about it when we got together on a weekly basis. He then invited me to look through it as well.
"I wouldn't say I was a part of Harold's research team. In fact, there was no research team as far as I could see. Harold did his own research. He also was interested in whatever I might have discovered or what others ran into, but when it came to going through Paul's library, Harold wanted to do that himself.
[... .]"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/gSz-OeYPFbM/Zfm_0cCWkHIJ
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/lIwAFh2S5hI/m/6pUCEiiOAgAJ

I remember asking about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others in this group years ago. And it seemed some people didn't like my questions about whether they were real. Yet, even before I asked my questions there was this.

"I'm not sure it matters what names Paul used as his teachers in his writings."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ

IOW there was Doug Marman who knew the truth and most likely Harod Klemp who knew it too; after going through Paul Twitchell's manuscripts after they were turned over by Darwin Gross. In the early 1980s!

Why did Doug Marman debate at length with David Lane then? Or, for that matter, with myself and others? Is Eckankar about the truth? Or is Eckankar about some special form of "spiritual truth" that (according to some) transcends historical truth and common sense?

Here is something I've been targeting and focusing on for many years. This idea of "spiritual truth" where people encourage the liberty to override common sense and the actual factual truth in order to change it and replace it with imagination however they like?

Is it - according to Doug - what Paul Twitchell really did? Make things up for some "spiritual" reasons and deliver fictions in deceptive packages whereby people were encouraged to buy them as truth? As "spiritual truth"?

If so much of Paul Twitchell's and Eckankar's writings were narrated, told and delivered as truth BUT WERE NOT THE ACTUAL FACTUAL TRUTH, then WHY was / is that? Is anybody getting me what I'm saying and asking here in this post? Why did they do ... ? / Why are they doing it? Why marketing fiction for truth? Why do religions do this? And on a deep psychological level What does this condition really mean? A condition and response to reality people were prone to delve into ever since primordial ignorance about Why thunder and lightning? Is it evidence for the human psyche growing anxious about its ignorance of many things?

I'm sure, and have already read, so many answers here about why Paul Twitchell, Eckankar and others spin / spun the truth. Two reasons being money and fame. Yet, IMO, these are superficial reasons or explanations even if true. I suspect something deeper underneath the reasons we have heard at a.r.e. I suspect something much deeper than the convenient idea of "spiritual truth". I suspect a deeper NEED TO KNOW the truth! A deeper fundamental need to know the vital, real, actual and factual truth. A need supported by an intense insecurity about NOT KNOWING THE TRUTH and NOT HAVING ACCURATE INFORMATION. A need whereby people HAVE TO HAVE the truth as if it were a matter of life and death. And even if they have to make it up rather than accept ignorance.

So next time someone asks for clarifying truth about religious dogma and someone from religion tries to "spin" the truth another way, maybe just keep asking. Keep asking unless you are satisfied with fiction for fact from ignorant people who make things up rather than risk looking stupid because they themselves (and those before them) never had the actual factual truth to begin with!

So what is the truth about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others? Has the leader of Eckankar told it when admitting Paul Twitchell sometimes (in so many words) fudged the truth and used "compiled" words to animate a lineage of masters and a history for Eckankar? Did Doug Marman tell it when trying to sell his "spiritual truth" to replace actual history, facts and real vital human lineages?
U
I think sometimes the truth gets spun because people can't accept their own ignorance. And I think sometimes the truth gets spun even AFTER the truth gets discovered and told. Precisely WHEN DROVES OF PEOPLE BELIEVED IN FICTIONS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME ALREADY! Why? Because ignorance and stupidity are amplified by the amount of time people persist in it! Not knowing the answer to a school test and soon learning the mistake is nothing compared with not knowing some of the basic fundamental truths about the universe, the world and human life for one's entire life or (given the same about one's ancestors) for centuries! Learning a mistake in the same year, compared with learning about a mistake after many, many years and STILL not believing it, doesn't even compare!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

With regard to Harold and Doug talking about things.
"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"
[Based on: January 2003 Doug Marman T.S. post - Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman]
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Yes, 1983 was about the time that Harold started going through Paul's library as well.
"Harold wanted to research it earlier, but Darwin had possession of it until 1983, when he turned it over to Harold. Harold put it all in a locked room at the ECK office.
"He began looking through what was there and would talk with me about it when we got together on a weekly basis. He then invited me to look through it as well.
"I wouldn't say I was a part of Harold's research team. In fact, there was no research team as far as I could see. Harold did his own research. He also was interested in whatever I might have discovered or what others ran into, but when it came to going through Paul's library, Harold wanted to do that himself.
[... .]"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/gSz-OeYPFbM/Zfm_0cCWkHIJ
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/lIwAFh2S5hI/m/6pUCEiiOAgAJ

I remember asking about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others in this group years ago. And it seemed some people didn't like my questions about whether they were real. Yet, even before I asked my questions there was this.
"I'm not sure it matters what names Paul used as his teachers in his writings."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
IOW there was Doug Marman who knew the truth and most likely Harod Klemp who knew it too; after going through Paul Twitchell's manuscripts after they were turned over by Darwin Gross. In the early 1980s!
Why did Doug Marman debate at length with David Lane then? Or, for that matter, with myself and others? Is Eckankar about the truth? Or is Eckankar about some special form of "spiritual truth" that (according to some) transcends historical truth and common sense?
Here is something I've been targeting and focusing on for many years. This idea of "spiritual truth" where people encourage the liberty to override common sense and the actual factual truth in order to change it and replace it with imagination however they like?
Is it - according to Doug - what Paul Twitchell really did? Make things up for some "spiritual" reasons and deliver fictions in deceptive packages whereby people were encouraged to buy them as truth? As "spiritual truth"?
If so much of Paul Twitchell's and Eckankar's writings were narrated, told and delivered as truth BUT WERE NOT THE ACTUAL FACTUAL TRUTH, then WHY was / is that? Is anybody getting me what I'm saying and asking here in this post? Why did they do ... ? / Why are they doing it? Why marketing fiction for truth? Why do religions do this? And on a deep psychological level What does this condition really mean? A condition and response to reality people were prone to delve into ever since primordial ignorance about Why thunder and lightning? Is it evidence for the human psyche growing anxious about its ignorance of many things?
I'm sure, and have already read, so many answers here about why Paul Twitchell, Eckankar and others spin / spun the truth. Two reasons being money and fame. Yet, IMO, these are superficial reasons or explanations even if true. I suspect something deeper underneath the reasons we have heard at a.r.e. I suspect something much deeper than the convenient idea of "spiritual truth". I suspect a deeper NEED TO KNOW the truth! A deeper fundamental need to know the vital, real, actual and factual truth. A need supported by an intense insecurity about NOT KNOWING THE TRUTH and NOT HAVING ACCURATE INFORMATION. A need whereby people HAVE TO HAVE the truth as if it were a matter of life and death. And even if they have to make it up rather than accept ignorance.
So next time someone asks for clarifying truth about religious dogma and someone from religion tries to "spin" the truth another way, maybe just keep asking. Keep asking unless you are satisfied with fiction for fact from ignorant people who make things up rather than risk looking stupid because they themselves (and those before them) never had the actual factual truth to begin with!
So what is the truth about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others? Has the leader of Eckankar told it when admitting Paul Twitchell sometimes (in so many words) fudged the truth and used "compiled" words to animate a lineage of masters and a history for Eckankar? Did Doug Marman tell it when trying to sell his "spiritual truth" to replace actual history, facts and real vital human lineages?
U
I think sometimes the truth gets spun because people can't accept their own ignorance. And I think sometimes the truth gets spun even AFTER the truth gets discovered and told. Precisely WHEN DROVES OF PEOPLE BELIEVED IN FICTIONS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME ALREADY! Why? Because ignorance and stupidity are amplified by the amount of time people persist in it! Not knowing the answer to a school test and soon learning the mistake is nothing compared with not knowing some of the basic fundamental truths about the universe, the world and human life for one's entire life or (given the same about one's ancestors) for centuries! Learning a mistake in the same year, compared with learning about a mistake after many, many years and STILL not believing it, doesn't even compare!

What is that called when people don't learn from their mistakes? Karma?

So Eckankar and clergy tell and have told about the many, many fictions and plagiarisms inhabiting religious dogma and history already? If so, then maybe it's just "some of us" who have believed in the leaders(s) of Eckankar like gods and have a hard time accepting the "death of an ideal"? Maybe? If that is the case then what is the lesson here? I think the lesson is that sometimes one has to be blunt and to the point when telling the truth and not try to have their cake and eat it too. Not try to dress their ignorance in NO CLOTHES as if everybody is going to imagine there are clothes! IOW, maybe the lesson is to just tell THE WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the WHOLE TRUTH! Making it all as if into poetry is an escapist attitude, IMHO.

Maybe karma will show who has learned and who has not learned from mistakes so far as "religious truth", or "spiritual truth" vs actual factual historical truth is concerned.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

With regard to Harold and Doug talking about things.
"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"
[Based on: January 2003 Doug Marman T.S. post - Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman]
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Yes, 1983 was about the time that Harold started going through Paul's library as well.
"Harold wanted to research it earlier, but Darwin had possession of it until 1983, when he turned it over to Harold. Harold put it all in a locked room at the ECK office.
"He began looking through what was there and would talk with me about it when we got together on a weekly basis. He then invited me to look through it as well.
"I wouldn't say I was a part of Harold's research team. In fact, there was no research team as far as I could see. Harold did his own research. He also was interested in whatever I might have discovered or what others ran into, but when it came to going through Paul's library, Harold wanted to do that himself.
[... .]"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/gSz-OeYPFbM/Zfm_0cCWkHIJ
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/lIwAFh2S5hI/m/6pUCEiiOAgAJ

I remember asking about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others in this group years ago. And it seemed some people didn't like my questions about whether they were real. Yet, even before I asked my questions there was this.
"I'm not sure it matters what names Paul used as his teachers in his writings."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
IOW there was Doug Marman who knew the truth and most likely Harod Klemp who knew it too; after going through Paul Twitchell's manuscripts after they were turned over by Darwin Gross. In the early 1980s!
Why did Doug Marman debate at length with David Lane then? Or, for that matter, with myself and others? Is Eckankar about the truth? Or is Eckankar about some special form of "spiritual truth" that (according to some) transcends historical truth and common sense?
Here is something I've been targeting and focusing on for many years. This idea of "spiritual truth" where people encourage the liberty to override common sense and the actual factual truth in order to change it and replace it with imagination however they like?
Is it - according to Doug - what Paul Twitchell really did? Make things up for some "spiritual" reasons and deliver fictions in deceptive packages whereby people were encouraged to buy them as truth? As "spiritual truth"?
If so much of Paul Twitchell's and Eckankar's writings were narrated, told and delivered as truth BUT WERE NOT THE ACTUAL FACTUAL TRUTH, then WHY was / is that? Is anybody getting me what I'm saying and asking here in this post? Why did they do ... ? / Why are they doing it? Why marketing fiction for truth? Why do religions do this? And on a deep psychological level What does this condition really mean? A condition and response to reality people were prone to delve into ever since primordial ignorance about Why thunder and lightning? Is it evidence for the human psyche growing anxious about its ignorance of many things?
I'm sure, and have already read, so many answers here about why Paul Twitchell, Eckankar and others spin / spun the truth. Two reasons being money and fame. Yet, IMO, these are superficial reasons or explanations even if true. I suspect something deeper underneath the reasons we have heard at a.r.e. I suspect something much deeper than the convenient idea of "spiritual truth". I suspect a deeper NEED TO KNOW the truth! A deeper fundamental need to know the vital, real, actual and factual truth. A need supported by an intense insecurity about NOT KNOWING THE TRUTH and NOT HAVING ACCURATE INFORMATION. A need whereby people HAVE TO HAVE the truth as if it were a matter of life and death. And even if they have to make it up rather than accept ignorance.
So next time someone asks for clarifying truth about religious dogma and someone from religion tries to "spin" the truth another way, maybe just keep asking. Keep asking unless you are satisfied with fiction for fact from ignorant people who make things up rather than risk looking stupid because they themselves (and those before them) never had the actual factual truth to begin with!
So what is the truth about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others? Has the leader of Eckankar told it when admitting Paul Twitchell sometimes (in so many words) fudged the truth and used "compiled" words to animate a lineage of masters and a history for Eckankar? Did Doug Marman tell it when trying to sell his "spiritual truth" to replace actual history, facts and real vital human lineages?
U
I think sometimes the truth gets spun because people can't accept their own ignorance. And I think sometimes the truth gets spun even AFTER the truth gets discovered and told. Precisely WHEN DROVES OF PEOPLE BELIEVED IN FICTIONS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME ALREADY! Why? Because ignorance and stupidity are amplified by the amount of time people persist in it! Not knowing the answer to a school test and soon learning the mistake is nothing compared with not knowing some of the basic fundamental truths about the universe, the world and human life for one's entire life or (given the same about one's ancestors) for centuries! Learning a mistake in the same year, compared with learning about a mistake after many, many years and STILL not believing it, doesn't even compare!

What is that called when people don't learn from their mistakes? Karma?
So Eckankar and clergy tell and have told about the many, many fictions and plagiarisms inhabiting religious dogma and history already? If so, then maybe it's just "some of us" who have believed in the leaders(s) of Eckankar like gods and have a hard time accepting the "death of an ideal"? Maybe? If that is the case then what is the lesson here? I think the lesson is that sometimes one has to be blunt and to the point when telling the truth and not try to have their cake and eat it too. Not try to dress their ignorance in NO CLOTHES as if everybody is going to imagine there are clothes! IOW, maybe the lesson is to just tell THE WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the WHOLE TRUTH! Making it all as if into poetry is an escapist attitude, IMHO.
Maybe karma will show who has learned and who has not learned from mistakes so far as "religious truth", or "spiritual truth" vs actual factual historical truth is concerned.

This was the initial thread. It grew to be long so I created a second one.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

With regard to Harold and Doug talking about things.
"[...] The reason I feel confident is because Harold talked with me about the whole issue of Paul's plagiarism shortly before he had that dream and gave those talks or started writing about it. He was quite straightforward and told me that even though it might be hard to swallow he was discovering a growing list. I know Harold was not happy with what he had learned and felt that Paul had left him a mess to clean up. This is exactly what he says at the end of his Astral Library dream as well. [... .]"
[Based on: January 2003 Doug Marman T.S. post - Response to Usually Skeptical: More Questions to Doug Marman]
http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx?st=152&page=179#m144
Yes, 1983 was about the time that Harold started going through Paul's library as well.
"Harold wanted to research it earlier, but Darwin had possession of it until 1983, when he turned it over to Harold. Harold put it all in a locked room at the ECK office.
"He began looking through what was there and would talk with me about it when we got together on a weekly basis. He then invited me to look through it as well.
"I wouldn't say I was a part of Harold's research team. In fact, there was no research team as far as I could see. Harold did his own research. He also was interested in whatever I might have discovered or what others ran into, but when it came to going through Paul's library, Harold wanted to do that himself.
[... .]"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/gSz-OeYPFbM/Zfm_0cCWkHIJ
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/lIwAFh2S5hI/m/6pUCEiiOAgAJ

I remember asking about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others in this group years ago. And it seemed some people didn't like my questions about whether they were real. Yet, even before I asked my questions there was this.
"I'm not sure it matters what names Paul used as his teachers in his writings."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
IOW there was Doug Marman who knew the truth and most likely Harod Klemp who knew it too; after going through Paul Twitchell's manuscripts after they were turned over by Darwin Gross. In the early 1980s!
Why did Doug Marman debate at length with David Lane then? Or, for that matter, with myself and others? Is Eckankar about the truth? Or is Eckankar about some special form of "spiritual truth" that (according to some) transcends historical truth and common sense?
Here is something I've been targeting and focusing on for many years. This idea of "spiritual truth" where people encourage the liberty to override common sense and the actual factual truth in order to change it and replace it with imagination however they like?
Is it - according to Doug - what Paul Twitchell really did? Make things up for some "spiritual" reasons and deliver fictions in deceptive packages whereby people were encouraged to buy them as truth? As "spiritual truth"?
If so much of Paul Twitchell's and Eckankar's writings were narrated, told and delivered as truth BUT WERE NOT THE ACTUAL FACTUAL TRUTH, then WHY was / is that? Is anybody getting me what I'm saying and asking here in this post? Why did they do ... ? / Why are they doing it? Why marketing fiction for truth? Why do religions do this? And on a deep psychological level What does this condition really mean? A condition and response to reality people were prone to delve into ever since primordial ignorance about Why thunder and lightning? Is it evidence for the human psyche growing anxious about its ignorance of many things?
I'm sure, and have already read, so many answers here about why Paul Twitchell, Eckankar and others spin / spun the truth. Two reasons being money and fame. Yet, IMO, these are superficial reasons or explanations even if true. I suspect something deeper underneath the reasons we have heard at a.r.e. I suspect something much deeper than the convenient idea of "spiritual truth". I suspect a deeper NEED TO KNOW the truth! A deeper fundamental need to know the vital, real, actual and factual truth. A need supported by an intense insecurity about NOT KNOWING THE TRUTH and NOT HAVING ACCURATE INFORMATION. A need whereby people HAVE TO HAVE the truth as if it were a matter of life and death. And even if they have to make it up rather than accept ignorance.
So next time someone asks for clarifying truth about religious dogma and someone from religion tries to "spin" the truth another way, maybe just keep asking. Keep asking unless you are satisfied with fiction for fact from ignorant people who make things up rather than risk looking stupid because they themselves (and those before them) never had the actual factual truth to begin with!
So what is the truth about Rebazar Tarzs, Sudar Singh and others? Has the leader of Eckankar told it when admitting Paul Twitchell sometimes (in so many words) fudged the truth and used "compiled" words to animate a lineage of masters and a history for Eckankar? Did Doug Marman tell it when trying to sell his "spiritual truth" to replace actual history, facts and real vital human lineages?
U
I think sometimes the truth gets spun because people can't accept their own ignorance. And I think sometimes the truth gets spun even AFTER the truth gets discovered and told. Precisely WHEN DROVES OF PEOPLE BELIEVED IN FICTIONS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME ALREADY! Why? Because ignorance and stupidity are amplified by the amount of time people persist in it! Not knowing the answer to a school test and soon learning the mistake is nothing compared with not knowing some of the basic fundamental truths about the universe, the world and human life for one's entire life or (given the same about one's ancestors) for centuries! Learning a mistake in the same year, compared with learning about a mistake after many, many years and STILL not believing it, doesn't even compare!

What is that called when people don't learn from their mistakes? Karma?
So Eckankar and clergy tell and have told about the many, many fictions and plagiarisms inhabiting religious dogma and history already? If so, then maybe it's just "some of us" who have believed in the leaders(s) of Eckankar like gods and have a hard time accepting the "death of an ideal"? Maybe? If that is the case then what is the lesson here? I think the lesson is that sometimes one has to be blunt and to the point when telling the truth and not try to have their cake and eat it too. Not try to dress their ignorance in NO CLOTHES as if everybody is going to imagine there are clothes! IOW, maybe the lesson is to just tell THE WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the WHOLE TRUTH! Making it all as if into poetry is an escapist attitude, IMHO.
Maybe karma will show who has learned and who has not learned from mistakes so far as "religious truth", or "spiritual truth" vs actual factual historical truth is concerned.

This was the initial thread. It grew to be long so I created a second one.

REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar II

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/rahQ1kNyB38/m/obqhqXedAQAJ

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

RE: Etznab says:
.....I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.

that's a curious comment. Given what I had said to you earlier this very day.

Very curious. :-)

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

sorry about the caps, not shouting or anything.
so was thinking, what's ging on here is Marman's version of cognitive dissonance.
"we" all as humans are susceptible to C-D or buyers remorse and other similar things.
I have issues wiht it, as does all imo, and this excuse making by/denial by Mamran his his special C-D issue .
in hindsight I say this .. when he first started writing dialogues on a.r.e I didn't see it that way.
but then I didn;t know much about marman and what he "really" thought about things.
now I see the hypocrisy of most of his positions and his approach/beliefs about "stuff" and Twitchell in particular.
while defending Paul no matter what ... and dissing Lane, Kirpal, J johnson the MSIA guy and many others ... he really lost touch with reality imo.
in klemps example of overcoming 5 stages of grief it's possibly tied in to the bargaining phase (yes?)
Anyway if Marman wants ot believe that Twitchell and himself Marman are some how connetced in along line of spiritual hierarchy back to Rumi, Nanak and so on .. well he can.
Marman can believe, think and believe whatever he wants to and say it.
That'll be his personal "karma" to deal with. and he already has been dealing with it, or rather confronted with facing it.
but alas, again the cognitive dissonance can protect one form the ruth of it.
Marman's no different than anyone else in that regard imo.
For me, well C-D is still a work in progress .. i guess it never goes away being susceptible to such human traits.
cheers and (whatever)

Yes. The bargaining stage for death of an ideal. Tell me it isn't so. Or maybe we can work it out.
Far as intentions go, I think Paul Twitchell's friend and 1st president of Eckankar had something to say about the matter.
"[...] I confronted him [Paul Twitchell] with what he had done and his answer was 'since the author of the book said it better than I could I copied it.' The trouble is that he never gave anyone credit as to where he got it. [... .]"
https://tinyurl.com/yxlep6x2
I would add that not only did he not give credit, he evidently instead created fictional characters and said he got it from them!

The author said it better than Paul could. And those authors were not Rebazar Tarzs and Eck Masters.

"[...] And as for 'keeping initiations' after one leaves the Teaching where they were given, what does it matter? If it still does matter, then has that person really left?
"Another principle here to remember: That which is granted by God can only be removed by God, but that which is granted by Man can be removed by Man. If you know what I mean. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/V-v3akrnuH0J

YES, more delusional clap trap .... underpinned by fantasies and disordered beliefs of one's own self-importance and the greatness of their RELIGION over all others ..
aka GUIDED BY GOD .. ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOD ... MARMAN'S FORTE .. no different than twitchell's fictions and Klemps and most other gurus teacechings ... aka the bible says and that's god's word.
childish and haughty clap trap (sorry for repeating myself ...)
regarding MARMAN AT ... "That which is granted by God can only be removed by God"

For me the whole issue comes down to the word "trust". IOW, Marman or whoever can spin it any way they want but IMO it really boils down to an issue of trust. Can the guru - whoever they are - be trusted? Can you trust what they say is true? Have they lied before? Do they have a habit of lying? Of copying other people's words and crediting them to someone else? A fictional character even?
O.K.? So I don't think it is so much about what one says or what they didn't say as much as it is about ARE THEY HONEST? CAN THEY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH?
Go back to the REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH" - quotes list and look at how Marman responds. How many times does he say (in so many words) "So what?" "What does it matter? Etc.

"[...] Lurk, I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd like to discuss these things, as I do, please understand that I'm interested in talking about the whole picture. I'm not particularly interested in talking about some piece of the puzzle out of context with the whole. If that interests you too, then let's pick a subject and try again.
"Like I offered before, I'm willing to tackle any subject you wish to discuss, as long as I can talk about it in context with the whole of the spiritual path.
"Again, thanks for listening."
Doug.
My comments: Doug's willing to tackle any subject.
I never saw these posts before, but it suits the purpose of looking at Doug's position in context to his whole series of posts over the years.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/W8JX-XpCkrUJ

Yeah well, it;s long long time ago now. Not much if anythign has chnaged.
i scrolled htis post reply by LURK
he hits the nail on the head fwiw ....
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/BlbxVQpzgjMJ
EG
"You know what that tells me. You basically are unable to admit to
mistakes you make in communication. It says to me that you are coming
from a place where you don't view me as an equal. It says you are more
interested in being right and only submerged and hide it your self
concept of being "neutral". Why would I think that?
Because if you are really interested in dialog, you would not only
acknowledge my listening to your feedback as you did, you would
acknowledge the feedback I gave you about your posts. (And your "we can
do better" statements in the first paragraph above don't qualify as
acknowledgements in case you think they do.) "
and
"I want to impress upon you that it is
not "all me," and for you to act like it is, is just another variation
on a theme I've been rebuking continually on this newsgroup. This is
what I mean when I say things are relational. And this is what I mean
when I say each plays a role in creating conditions.
You know what your response prompts me to do? Be more confrontational.
Why? Because I view your response as not seriously wanting to
communicate but to defend by making me exclusively the issue."
note *** confrontational *** see my recent post on maplin thread about this via SCN pov/writings
when Lurk was around i didn't really grasp what he was on about.
soi I must have learned something since then, because he replies make a lot more sense to me than the stuff DM was always spewing.
he was FIXATED on his onw pov while claiming he loved to hear others.
he was/is most self-delusioned aka dysfunctional (but all have issues there)
A man is NO MASTER when he has NO CLUE ( ie lacks self-awareness ) why people are driven to CONFRONT his BULLSHIT ....
That's our Doug alright.
and it;s why he has long record of RUNNING AWAY when confronted like that.
and then he BLOCKS genuine people from discussing it in details.
It's why whatever Doug wants to do, thinks he is doing of late it will lead to a bad end .. especially for those who can;t help but look up to him, put him on a pedestal and swoon in wondrous written / spoken sophistry and beliefs ...
but what's the point of making him the issue?
the time to confront him has long past imho.
imho he's not important enough. the less attention he and eckankar are given the faster they'll evaporate.
but of course there are other sides to the story ... and we can all potentially learn from the past.
anyway whatever. iow I don't so much care about the stuff that makes no sense any more or finding some pat answer or historical event that nails the problems within eckankar or twitchell.
but that's just me hey, other options are ok too.
cheers

A part of my interest is the psychology of it all. Namely, What makes people lie in spite of enormous opposition and evidence to the contrary?Most especially in religious circles?

(Sorry. Had to fix some typos.)
It's been this way a long time in the organized religious arena. Not only the propagating of pseudo history as literally true, but the general granting of liberty to charismatic liars good at making things up.
I think this kind of thing should stay in the area of science fiction and not serve as catalyst for war environmental destruction and economical collapse.
The other day I was contemplating that story about The Emperor's New Clothes and ideas of why people would not accept truth when right in front of their faces. One answer that came to me was "peer pressure". The fear of thinking outside the box, or not like "everybody else". Another answer was the simple shock of disbelief, a not wanting to believe something so radically different from the norm.
So for me I am looking at the new Age religion of Eckankar like a symptom in a long line of evolutionary symptoms. I've looked back at history of religion from caveman (and cave women) days, what is the consensus believed today; and up on through hunter gatherer societies, city states, the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, new Age, New Thought, etc. I really like to understand this. It interests me very much. Lying for profit and power and how people manage to get away with it IN SPITE OF the truth standing right next to them and known by a lot of the public.
I wonder. Do people really want Gods so much they're willing to invent them? or allow others to do it for them? Do people really want a Utopian world so much where things are fair, people get along, with no wars, the water and the land pure, etc., that they willingly imagine one (or let others do it for them and write books about it?). Because if these things are really true then maybe they are severe signs of insecurity, or a lacking of the very things they desperately imagine and want to believe?
In any case, "The Days of Marman" for me are like an episode out of Lord of The Rings. One where two forces battled for power. And so it was, at one time here in a.r.e., where Marman and his army of Bright Future apologists rode for the eck brand. You were either with them, or against them. Rode for their brand, or rode for a detractor brand (so to speak). And there were motivations for those things. There were causes and reasons. So I am now looking deeply into those things like with a microscope, and because I missed so much of that dialogue / conversation. What was / is the actual verifiable truth that Marman was / is standing on vs. "more of the same" psycho babble and pseudo imaginary history? This interests me and is why I research and write about it.

This next conversation is rather unbelievable to me.
"Joe, do you really think I was saying anyting as extreme as you are making this out to be?
"Doug, I was quoting you. You called my posting of Paul's quotes 'a true crime against truth.' So I guess the answer here is 'yes.' "
"Here I am talking about trying to bring more balance into our discussions and that somehow becomes the basis for me somehow asking for extreme measures?"
My comments: To be fair, one needs to consider the context here. So here is the link for that purpose.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/-qKcA_LUBwYJ

Harold Klemp didn't use the computer or post online due to EMF radiation, whatever. Point being that he was not online doing one-on-one questions and answers like with the discussions here on a.r.e. Enter, Doug Marman.
IMO it looks like Doug took it upon himself to be the "front man" for Harold Klemp and the Eckankar organization; in spite of his denials that was the case.
Doug tries to separate the organization from the spiritual teaching in a way that defies belief, IMHO.
"[...] Harold specifically gave a number of talks and wrote a number of articles where he explains that Paul was more of a Compiler than original author of the teachings. That was quite a dramatic statement when he made it. Harold talked about Paul's younger life, his stretching the stories of his own past, and how he was often promoting himself in his career as a writer. Harold may have been more polite than you would have been, but I think the points Harold made were definitely dealing with these issues and not in any way making excuses or offering mystical explanations.
"But, once again, why are we making Paul or Harold the issue? Are they really the issue? Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the impacts of the teachings themselves, rather than trying to turn the spiritual path into a personal matter?
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Based on: post from December 23rd, 1998 (last post on page)
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/80FC_-yE4Ts/m/1-YZdEjoP7QJ
Why do I see Doug as the "front man"? Maybe I should give a definition.
1. the lead singer of a pop or rock group.
2. a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.
Doug has denied "representing" the organization. That he was acting all on his own. However, I use the word "front man" in part on account of how many people followed "behind" him and what he wrote. Remember the date here. 1998. This was BEFORE the publishing of Dialogues in the Age of Critisism and The Whole Truth. This was before the SDP (Spiritual Dialogues Project) created by Doug, along with his BB (bulletin board) including Patti Simpson and others. Like it or not, I believe it fair to say Doug was representing Eckankar, even if he wants to call it his "Eckankar".
So already it is 2021. Forty years from the time when Harold Klemp was named the new leader of Eckankar. I believe 1983 was around the time when Harold and Doug reportedly set eyes on files previously in the possession of Harold Klemp's predecessor, Darwin Gross. I'm not sure what exactly to call them. Paul's personal files / writings, or Paul's personal library, etc. Regardless, Doug wrote that Harold was not exactly happy after looking at some things and / or hearing from members asking about Eckankar writings mirroring the writings of NOT ECKANKAR MASTERS, but the writings of various NEW AGE and other authors whose books can be found in the library!
Long story short, this poster believes both Doug Marman and Harold Klemp knew about Paul Twitchell's copying, paraphrasing, plagiarizing and the putting of other author's words into the mouths of the eck masters as if the eck masters were saying them since at least the early 1980s, or close to four decades! The difference being they were privy to EVIDENCE not available to the eyes of the membership and others generally, like as if through some form of Freedom of Information Act, whatever. IOW, what I contend (and are seeing more and more evidence for after reading Doug's early a.r.e. posts) is that Harold and Doug likely knew things beyond the shadow of a doubt for many years already and that both of them have REPRESENTED Paul Twitchell and Eckankar in their own ways.
Fictional characters animated by copied, paraphrased and / or plagiarized writings? What about that? Harold's answer, in short, says that Paul was a "MASTER COMPILER"? Whereas, when it comes to making things up, Doug (in so many words) writes "never mind that"? Or at this point what does it matter? I want to look at the word represent here so people are clear what I mean. A lot of the words from this dictionary include histories; and give the evolution of forms and meanings.
"to bring to mind by description"
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent
Doug wrote at least a couple books already. Before that he wrote reams of posts here at a.r.e. What did he write about? Did he write about Eckankar the teaching, the organization, the spiritual path, etc.? Did he write about the founders of Eckankar and the leaders since the time it was founded? Did Doug Marman link names for historically-known individuals with the spiritual teachings, or Eckankar?
Not to belabor the point, but Doug seems to bring up the topic of "intentions" from various angles. Like (as if in so many words) How can one know the meaning of a person's actions if they don't know their intentions? In part, a potentially dubious answer.
"I've often heard the ECK critics on a.r.e. complain about ECKist trying to make them into the point of the discussion. Well, isn't focusing on Paul's or Harold's personal motivations similar, since it is implying that this is a valid way of judging the teachings themselves? [... .]"
Is there a saying that goes "Wiggle while you work?" Oh no! That was "Whistle while you work." Well ... it looks to me like Doug was not whistling, but more like wiggling. And I say this on account of representing history, actual historical fact and those to whom who it matters both personally and significantly. IOW recorded history and the depiction of it can be a representation of actual happenings and looking at such recordings DOES NOT necessarily depend on the thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, etc. of the writer if / when a viewer's primary interest is to clarify FACT from FICTION!
Can Harold, Doug, or members of Eckankar (generally) admit to fictional masters? Can they admit that fictional masters were created for the teachings of Eckankar and promoted by leaders and members of Eckankar for decades? Even as though such eck masters were / are real? Would they, could they admit it while under oath in a court of law? Or for that matter, Have they (anybody) done so already? Because if the latter is the case, I mean if the questions and answer already happened and is on record, Can the public access the court records and read it for themselves? Was there already an official "on the record" admission in spite of that written in the Eckankar books and blogs, etc.? I'm not sure I know there was such an admission. What I suspect, however, is that the scenario is inevitable whereby a defendant may ask the question. The question about are any of the eck masters fictional and How long has the leadership / Eckankar corp. known about it?
It was not solely asking about How Eckankar answered questions, allegations, reports, suspicions, beliefs, etc. about fictional masters. It was asking about whether the Eckankar leadership knew about it? and How long they knew about it? And I mean knew about it via evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt?
Maybe it's best to put those questions and answers beside the questions and answers to and from Doug Marman over the years. Because, to be quite frank, something looks glaringly amiss regarding the discussions I am looking at now. Like the plain truth about masters? Really living? or fictional and imaginary? And not to be misunderstood, I don't dislike all fictional characters. Even fictional masters. Provided I know that they are fictional. What I (and I suspect others too) don't like are fictional masters and imitations sold as the real thing.
Intermission.
http://youtu.be/q5F1Cy7FpAA

Sri Data wrote?
"2. Paul Twitchell claimed that Rebezar Tarz, the Eck master before him, came to him and gave him part of the 'Eck teachings'.
"FACT: Many of the words Rebezar Tarz speaks in Twitchell's books are plagiarized from the works of Julian Johnson."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
That was from May 6th, 1999. Not so may years after the debut of personal computers and online chat groups. A.R.E. (this group) began in 1997?
So consider the context here. If nothing else the context of time; IOW, when it appeared in history. And remember, most of these earlier threads I am (perhaps like some other readers here) reading just now.
Doug Marman responded to Sri Data about those quotes I gave. And Sri Data touched on one of my core queries about Eckankar history, so I find this dialogue very interesting. One of my two "core" questions about Eckankar history (since like the time I began posting) involves "Who, or What really is Rebazar Tarzs?"
Let's look at how Doug responded (the thread title I'm quoting from is called: Its not about logic, its about lies).
"Paul used a technique known to writers as fictionalization. This is when an author would like to present a bunch of important information but doesn't want to do it in a boring, preaching way, but would rather present the material in a way that not only says something, but also shows something.
"This is rarely understood by those who haven't spent a great deal of time trying to write: It is not easy to show what you are trying to say, but it leaves a much more durable impression because it comes closer to truth.
"There is no truth in facts, nor for that matter in data. (Sorry to smear your name here.) Facts and data can be interpreted however you would like. So, real truth lies within our inner recognition of it.
"Those who go on trying to spell out the spiritual teachings like it is a laudry list of facts are missing what the spiritual path is all about. Paul cast his writings as a dialogue between himself and Rebazar Tarzs because it showed far more than it could have otherwise. It represented the relationship that the
seeker can have with the Inner Teacher, and the spiritual teachings that are available to the sincere student.
"Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' fictionalized accounts of famous people such as George Washington, Leonardo Da Vinci, or
Madame Curie, but this doesn't mean those people don't exist. Using those people in a fictionalized account doesn't somehow make them disappear, or the message somehow become untrue."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
I'll try to keep this short. That said, after reading the first three paragraphs of Doug's response I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
Then after reading this part: "Like your first point, it is true Paul did not credit the words he used to Julian Johnson, nor the other authors, but this still doesn't discount the teachings themselves. Many authors have written 'I Was There' [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/K4e_6WSB3Ro/m/ZXj5BTxZD7QJ
Yada, yada, yada. And Paul wrote that he went to Paris France with his sister and stayed at some master's ashram; until people learned it was more like Paris, Kentucky!
For my part, it's not about whether the teachings inspire, etc. Fiction books inspire too, and I do love science fiction movies. My core question concerns What is Rebazar Tarzs? Is he? Was he ever? A real living human being master?
So I read a lot of quotes by Doug Marman who, in the early 1980s after Harold Klemp became Eckankar leader, looked over some of the founder's "personal files / library" along with Harold Klemp and they (according to written testimony by Doug Marman) talked about things.
"[...] A few years after Harold became the Master, he began researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records. Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study. [... .]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
In sum, it looks to me like Doug has been saying (since at least the 1990s) that Rebazar Tarzs was a fiction. That Paul Twitchell used that name as a fiction.

.....I said to myself: "I think Doug is sick. Like, mentally ill." At least, those were the thoughts that came to me.
that's a curious comment. Given what I had said to you earlier this very day.
Very curious. :-)

Meaning, about the coincidence / timing, it was written before I said what I said or read it here. It's good imo when such things happen. la di da :-)

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Maplin

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

Judging by many things already written by Doug Marman, I suspect he knew for a long time Paul Twitchell lied and made things up. I think Doug Marman not only knew about this, but I think clearly he considered it not terribly important.
One can search multiple Doug Marman posts for rhyme or reason, but I believe his rationale was present right from the beginning. A rationale that had already stewed for years.
Go back to 1997 and one of Doug Marman's first posts after a.r.e. began. (This one is best read beginning to end in context, yet I give but a taste for now.)
"[...] But the bottom line is: So what? What difference does it really make? Lane suggests that if Paul lied about this, then how can you trust anything he says? Well, for one thing, who says you should trust anything Paul said?
"[...] And once you've gained that connection, who cares if it is fiction? It is certainly fiction of a whole different sort. A fiction that is truer than fact.
"[...] The origins of living teachings cannot be found by tracing historical events, but only by making contact with the higher states of consciousness from where they spring.
"[...] As a story of historical fact, Paul's story may not hold up very well. But that is not what it was meant for. It was intended for connecting us to a reality that is more real than any historical fact. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
I was not much present when this first appeared here, but many posts I have yet to review. For a long time I've wanted to read the parts I missed and it's helpful to visit these things now.

RE ONE COMMENT BY DOUG BACK WHEN ... that you reference
"Once you gain that inward connection, you have access
to truth through direct perception. Without these inner teachings, you
might as well be reading fiction. And once you've gained that connection,..."
FROM https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/MvIbPqSXZNc/m/ZTE7Djvb9zAJ
Now, imo, this is consistent through Patti Simpson and Doug and several other HIs and 8ths quoted in the past ...
My point is this ... 1) You do NOT need Eckankar, or Twitchell's writings, or Harold klemp or any eckankar eck masters; nor initiations, nor discourses etc etc to
"have access to truth through direct perception"
but 2) placing one's attention onto such options might prepare the field but that's besides the point. It's NOT a thing learned by ROTE, either (imho)
and 3) in fact TWITCHELL"s writings and lectures and discourses set people OFF IN ALL KINDS OF MIS_DIRECTIONS and DEAD ENDS and mental INSTABILITIES ... AND madness INSTEAD.
and then came Klemps and Darwins' AUTHORITY FREAK OUTS that also harmed people in ways we will never know about.
so lastly 4) ..."once you've gained that INNER connection.." then the last thing you need is ECKANKAR, and you defintiely do not need A Doug Marman or a Patti-Simpson or a Gail, or a harold ....
or a books about RUMI or another book about NANAK, or Paul Twitchell, or "lenses of perception" or the rest of crap being sprouted by MARMAN
THAT'S ALL FICTION NO BETTER THAN TWITCHELL'S FICTIONS AND LIES AND SPIN AND EGO DRESSING ... so people who need this kind of stuff has clearly NOT found the "inner teachings" nor are they "experienced" (but so what anyway!) WHO IS TO JUDGE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
DEFINITELY NOT A MARMAN, that is for sure!
SO, EXCUSE ME FOR SAYING SO, BUT THE LAST OF THE 5 PASSIONS TO BE OVERCOME IS VANITY ....
So well expressed by "anecdotes" in Twitchell, and Klemp and Marman ... and many other Eckankar apologists here over the decades.
Marman is defending the indefensible and making up excuses fore the inexcusable and the INCOMPETENT and the NARCISSISTIC well out of their depth.
He and Patti S and others are giving CREDIT to Twitchell for something he does not deserve credit for... while giving him a get out of jail free card for the HARM he (Darwin, Klempo and Marman and Gail, and Patti S and others) ) caused to tens possibly hundreds of thousands of people without a care in the world while taking their money hand of over fist for now close to 70 years.
cheers
PS the above may not make must sense to many readers; and Marman would surely deny it all ..... no one is as sharp or as experienced as he is ... just ask him, LOL, he'll tell you.

as you know I'm not a member of Eckankar and I don't know much of its
teaching, but I'm always prepared to read a heart-felt response like
this. Pretty rigorous stuff, and I see you mean it when you post it. I
appreciate that.

You don't have to be a member to know about it.
And Paul Twitchell didn't write everything, because he copied a lot. A whole lot! So there are a whole lot of New Age and Mental Science teachings, etc. What people debate is the dogma, the history and mythology.
In organized religions some people are prone to interpreting things literally, and some preachers loathe to tell the actual truth.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [...] There is often talk, when the issue of plagiarism and Paul Twitchell come up, that we should expect more of our spiritual leaders, but this is completely based upon attributing motivations to Paul that we do not know. And as I've just said, this has nothing to do with Paul's role as leader, and what he has brought into this world. [...] One thing I have come to learn from studying the lives of such spiritual leaders, is that they seem to have far less concern for the common worldly ideas of factual truths. They recognize that spiritual Truth cannot be constrained in such straight jackets. And they do understand and see their mythic role that they occupy. Thus, finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. [...] The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings. And yet, as the Sufis say, God gives credit to his messengers."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
There was a term in those excerpts from Doug's writings I have seen him use before. The term is "spiritual Truth". And it seems that in Doug's opinion "spiritual Truth" is somehow superior to "worldly ideas of factual truths". I wonder if Doug even realizes how dangerous are his statements about truth and what people should expect from their spiritual leaders.
And the things is, people have given lots of feedback to Doug indicating they don't agree with him. However, Doug appears to continue unshaken from his personal focus like a computer program that cannot be changed.

Marman has a default superiority complex (or choose whatever words suit) in his COMPULSIVE use of the ROYAL *WE*
It manifests (and I and others pointed this out form time to time, but no effect) as Marman ASSUMING he speaks for OTHERS as if he is the ONLY knowledgeable leader around.
SUCH AS ... That we would make
we all have learned
if we are going to
we should expect more
that we do not know ... (and yet ARMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAYING WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT TWITCHELL'S WHY HE DID THIS OR THAT AND HIS MOTIVATIONS FOR DECADES .. CLAIMING ALL OTHER OPTIONS ARE WRONG - HE DOES IT AGOIN IN THIS QUOTED SECTION ABOVE)
AND WHO THE HELL BELIEVES THAT FACTUAL TRUTHS, FACTS, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, HISTORY ETC ARE "in such straight jackets. " ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT .... HISTORY KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE AND KNOWN FACTS HAS ALWAYS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEW INFO ARISES ...
WHY IS MARMAN IN THIS STRAIGHT JACKET CLAIMING NOTHING NEVER CHANGES IN OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE FACTS??????
WHY IS MARMAN INSISTING ON BELITTLING NEW-FOUND INFORMATION ABOUT TWITCHELL AND HIS WRITINGS COMING TO LIGHT AND BEING KNOWN?
WHAT IS MARMAN SO AFRAID OF?
PROBABLY THE TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT ECKANKAR AND HIS OWN PERSONAL DUMBFOUNDED BELIEFS ....
"finding discrepencies in their personal lives cannot explain anything. "
FUCKING BULLSHIT DOUG .. TOTAL CRAP.
WHY WOULD MARMAN THEN MENTION PARIS KENTUCKY RE THE PARIS FRANCE BS STORY
IN THAT MARMAN CLAIMED IT EXPLAINED SOMETHING ABOUT TWICHELL ..
THE GUY IS DEAD SET DELUSIONAL AND A HYPOCRITE WHO CHANGES HIS OWN STORY / EXCUSES TO SUIT THE MOMENT AS OFTEN AS TWITCHELL DID
one little quote explains so much that is wrong with MARMAN
"The fact is that these leaders merely represented the forces and teachings that they brought into this world. These leaders were not the sources, but only the carriers of the message. God is the source of all, and the end goal of all spiritual teachings.
The same goes for leaders like Hitler then too then.
PEOPLE DO NOT SUDDENLY BECOME NON-HUMAN / SUPER-HUMAN BECAUSE THEY WRITE SOMETHING CLAIMED TO BE "SPIRITUAL" OR THE "TRUTH"
IN MARMAN'S WORLD ALL GURUS CONVEY THE TRUTH ????
WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS GUY?
I'LL TELL YOU ... HIS MIND WAS POISONED BY PAUL TWITCHELL'S WRITINGS AND MADE UP CRAPPOLLA.
MARMAN BECAME A MANIPULATOR TOO.
(SHRUG)

No. I think the large caps were just fine. And (in this case) necessary to express the points.

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

RE
ETZNAB ASKED
"In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true? "

I say NO and NO is the answer.

RE
" that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world."

GAIL Twitchell amateur hour as told by the SUCKER "Soultraveler" ....

You do not need to employ LIES or DECEIT to present Truth .... or notions of light and sound or inner awareness and meditation practices and so on ...

Using fiction writing is fine and dandy ... like novels and plays and other artistic endeavours sucha s poetry or songs or paintings -- they are NOT lies because people are to9ld they and know they are FICTIONAL ART - there is no deception there.

ECKANLKAR is deception from woe to go. FRom 1963 to today.

Lies upon lies upon lies.

Unnecessary lies at that.

Then the cover-ups and the gullibility ( nay Cognitive Dissonance - excuse making) of thousands.

It was ramakrishna (?) who said "good to be born into a church bad to die in one."

[Henosis Sage]

another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.

she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?

Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...

the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.

That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

Ya know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out to common sense and human decency. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting the people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests, lobbyists, etc.

IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling truth to death!

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.

IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

More Doug Marman quotes:

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.

"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ

Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?

"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ

Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.

Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?

I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.

I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.

IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.

http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html

The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).

Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham

Compare:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

https://www.discoveryourdepths.com/blog/ek-ong-kar

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

https://www.discoveryourdepths.com/blog/ek-ong-kar

Want to attach a link here.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/bHDdElOogZQ/m/XfAyJDmGCAAJ

The only reason being the translation here of Ek Ong Kar as: "The Creator and the Creation are One."

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

https://www.discoveryourdepths.com/blog/ek-ong-kar

Want to attach a link here.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/bHDdElOogZQ/m/XfAyJDmGCAAJ
The only reason being the translation here of Ek Ong Kar as: "The Creator and the Creation are One."

Speaking about right and wrong, IMHO Doug Marman has an odd way of looking at it.

"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ

I see these types of comments by Doug (looking at many of them for the first time now) and I think it has little to do with right and wrong and more to do with Doug wanting to apologize for Paul Twitchell and Eckankar.

What is it Doug? Rebazar Tarzs is a real living master? or a made up fiction? Passing a fictional master off as a living one is WRONG Doug. It is WRONG because Twitchell wrote extensively about living masters and why they are important. And living doesn't mean imaginary!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

https://www.discoveryourdepths.com/blog/ek-ong-kar

Want to attach a link here.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/bHDdElOogZQ/m/XfAyJDmGCAAJ
The only reason being the translation here of Ek Ong Kar as: "The Creator and the Creation are One."

Speaking about right and wrong, IMHO Doug Marman has an odd way of looking at it.
"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
I see these types of comments by Doug (looking at many of them for the first time now) and I think it has little to do with right and wrong and more to do with Doug wanting to apologize for Paul Twitchell and Eckankar.
What is it Doug? Rebazar Tarzs is a real living master? or a made up fiction? Passing a fictional master off as a living one is WRONG Doug. It is WRONG because Twitchell wrote extensively about living masters and why they are important. And living doesn't mean imaginary!

Along with right and wrong, I find myself wondering if Doug knows the meaning of the words REAL, LIVING and VITAL? Or if Doug was trying to brainwash people back then into believing that wrong is right and right is wrong?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

I wonder how many people know history for the word "I"?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=aham
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/%C3%A9%C7%B5h%E2%82%82

https://www.discoveryourdepths.com/blog/ek-ong-kar

Want to attach a link here.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/bHDdElOogZQ/m/XfAyJDmGCAAJ
The only reason being the translation here of Ek Ong Kar as: "The Creator and the Creation are One."

Speaking about right and wrong, IMHO Doug Marman has an odd way of looking at it.
"[...] I, for one, love the differences. That we would make different choices, I think is fascinating and makes for interesting discussions and debates. But the painting of each other as if one side is wrong, and the other is right, does surprise me, because I think we all have learned early on in our spiritual search, that the Social Conscience, where the wordly ideas of right and wrong are bandied about, must be abandoned if we are going to find real Truth. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XyM6OgFl9zI/m/dHTqQiQmD3wJ
I see these types of comments by Doug (looking at many of them for the first time now) and I think it has little to do with right and wrong and more to do with Doug wanting to apologize for Paul Twitchell and Eckankar.
What is it Doug? Rebazar Tarzs is a real living master? or a made up fiction? Passing a fictional master off as a living one is WRONG Doug. It is WRONG because Twitchell wrote extensively about living masters and why they are important. And living doesn't mean imaginary!

O.K. So I wasn't active here in a.r.e. when those posts happened and are responding later. However, I wanted to look at Doug's beliefs, sayings and suggestions from the beginning and up to the present day; and illustrate some common themes. Because I'm finding that Doug didn't so much change his tune over the years, but much of what is expressed today are things he wrote about decades ago.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage
another side bar -- Patti explains in one of her books about Paul (hello freind?) where she was about quit eckankar once she relaised Paul was no LEM who could "soul travel" or be in contatc with his chelas, like her.
she drank the koolaide and believed him, once she realised he had intentionally decived her and everyone else she was about to quit ... then COGNITIVE DISSONANCE kicked in and she gave Paul "credit" for teaching her to work out when someone like Paul was lying to her and she was being GULLIBLE and NAIVE .... like wtf?
Later once hooked up with doug via SDP and online various places (as per Karma seeker book) she would tell others who had also worked out they was no LEM< Mahanta, or soul travel conatc by eck matsers and the like that they should NOT tell othe rpoeple becasue it short circuited the "great teachings of Twitchell" to arrive at the end point ...
the end point being is that all of Eckankar is BULLSHIT .. and yet Patti still "believed " in the fake initiations as well until she died and thinked the sun shined out of twitchells' asshole.
That ECKANKAR was just another version of the bullshit in the lower worlds "paul wanted us to overcome" .... madness!!! it's madness what Patti, Klemp and marman and other believe about twitchell, and eckankar and the value of placing one's life in the hands of such a FAKE FALSE deception created by a deluded narcissist nutter as in Twitchell ...

a know what? People do things that give them a "high". It can be drugs, or it can be intoxicating food. They share it with other people who get "turned on" and those people share it with others. After a while somebody is making a lot of money selling the things that make people "high". It can be drugs. It can be food. It can be a story, like fiction. It can even be pseudo religion and history. Sometimes it is "peer pressure" that convinces a person to take a course opposite of common sense. People want to belong more than they want to be in a minority doing the right thing. They want to be one of the "cool kids". Want to be in the "in crowd" where subservience brings kudos and promotions. IOW people sell out common sense and human decency to morons and idiots. Like leaders charged with representing the people who instead become selfish to the extent of exploiting people for personal power and gain. Other times it is simply a matter of holding onto their position by doing what is expected of them; expected not by the people, but by corporate interests and lobbyists, etc. The latter love to have morons and idiots working for them, because decent people would only refuse to follow their orders.
IMO Marman should have struck the root of fiction with actual facts and truth. Instead it looks like he allowed fiction freedom to grow to the point of covering over and strangling the truth to death!

"[...] And no matter what anyone might do, organizations will always look after themselves. Organizations can not act any other way when they are leading.
"This is why the inner connection to Spirit, the ECK, is the only thing that we can rely on. [...]
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Inner connection to spirit is the the ONLY thing we can rely on? I don't think it is the ONLY thing. What about the outer master? Can we rely on the leader of Eckankar to tell the truth?
"And if the teaching is sincere about the spiritual path, it needs to point out over and over again its own limitations in its outer form. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/flPIG63ZhWM/m/8xOvqxhQSasJ
Oh yes. Like a living master who can't tell the truth? This, above all things (and since the LEM is "Corporation Sole") should be looked at. Also, IMHO, those who make a God out of a man need to be looked at too. Their limitations noted.
Has Harold Klemp, the LEM, ever publicly stated that Paul Twitchell made up the character Rebazar Tarzs and that Rebazar Tarzs was a created fiction animated by copied words of other writers? Because if these things are true, that R.T. was a made up fiction animated by compiled words and imagination, etc., What do you call it when the leader of the organization can't admit that? How about call it a serious LIMITATION?
I ask these questions as a member of Eckankar. I ask them because how can people move forward? How can the organization or religion move forward without the truth? If Paul created fictional masters then it's high time to admit it in plain words. Doug Marman has already admitted in so many ways that Paul created fictions, but he can brush it all aside and default to an inner connection with spirit.
I've yet to see what the arguments have been about all these years except getting people to look at and accept the truth. Accept the actual factual true events from history that are provable by evidence. Paul Twitchell's intentions matter not a wit when it comes to proving whether he knowingly created fictions and led people on for years. Doug say WE can't know Paul's intentions, but at the same time Doug seems to think he knows so much about what is important for US and OTHERS.
IMO Doug acted like someone who thought they might become the next leader of Eckankar and was already preparing his narrative for all things Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. He writes in large bold letters THE WHOLE TRUTH and superimposes it over the face of Paul Twitchell.
http://www.spiritualdialogues.com/thewholetruth.html
The Whole Truth? The spiritual legacy of Paul Twitchell? Doug knows this? (notice how the word "spiritual" is thrown in there).
Doug knows the intentions of Paul Twitchell?
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=legacy

[...] My opinion, Dave, since you have expressed yours above, is that the only person
we should try to keep on a hook is our own selves. We should take full responsibility for everything we create, and we should try to be conscious and aware of our own decisions. This leaves us free to continue on with our lives, and not get hung up on how someone else's choices might have affected our lives, which are things of the past. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/GBwgDKAztbI/m/zAJCPXv-SP8J

Not get hung up on how someone else's choices might have affected our lives?

I wonder. Do they teach this in the Arahata training course?

"DAVID CONTINUED:
Gathering myths, gathering stories is one thing (see the Chicken Soup for theSoul series---by the way, Canfield used to be a follower of John-Roger until he got a bomb threat from the dude---each story is cited and appropriately referenced), but to then neglect the "real" authorship and then substitute it with a Tibetan monk is just plain duplicity...........

"DOUG RESPONDS:
Strange as it may seem today, back when Paul began writing his books, such as The Far Country, the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/GBwgDKAztbI/m/zAJCPXv-SP8J

How about a real live living master? Or an unbroken lineage of masters going back millions of years. Harold Klemp's position (and anybody else - including you, Doug - who should become LEM in the future) is propped up by a myth?

People have been denied positions of power in religion when others believed they made up some myths. Myths about their importance. Including people who thought they were the next LEM to be. So I think there goes the rug out from under Marman's definitions of myth. The purpose and the use of it.

[Henosis Sage]

RE "the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."

HORSE SHIT IT WAS ... more rationalisation and crap from Marman.

any ol' excuse is a good excuse. make up some MYTHS to cover up the MYTHS created by others ... what a dead shit excuse for a human being.

he's as thick as a door post

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Henosis Sage
RE "the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."
HORSE SHIT IT WAS ... more rationalisation and crap from Marman.
any ol' excuse is a good excuse. make up some MYTHS to cover up the MYTHS created by others ... what a dead shit excuse for a human being.
he's as thick as a door post

With a straight face and unable to lie straight in bed Doug marman says:

"Hey, in the 1960s everyone was lying about stuff and making shit up. Paul Twitchell had no other choice if he was going to compete.
This is why Darwin and Harold Klemp continued with that exact same course of action after everyone found it .. they kept using IE PLAGIARISING WITHOUT CREDIT other people texts to create more Eckankar Dogma and stuff .. ya see.?"

Oh hang about... does that even make sense?

Of course not, marman is was and always will be FULL OF SHIT and LIES and MANIPULATIONS ... it's his nature.

The great apologist!

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage
RE "the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."
HORSE SHIT IT WAS ... more rationalisation and crap from Marman.
any ol' excuse is a good excuse. make up some MYTHS to cover up the MYTHS created by others ... what a dead shit excuse for a human being.
he's as thick as a door post

"Hey, in the 1960s everyone was lying about stuff and making shit up. Paul Twitchell had no other choice if he was going to compete.
This is why Darwin and Harold Klemp continued with that exact same course of action after everyone found it .. they kept using IE PLAGIARISING WITHOUT CREDIT other people texts to create more Eckankar Dogma and stuff .. ya see.?"
Oh hang about... does that even make sense?
Of course not, marman is was and always will be FULL OF SHIT and LIES and MANIPULATIONS ... it's his nature.
The great apologist!

This is the most interesting thing. One reason I created this thread title. The idea that people who know the truth continue not to fully clarify it, while other peoples lives are affected tremendously as a result.

I think myths can affect people lives in good ways and bad ways. Eckankar Inc. and Marman seem to highlight the good ways, but don't want to talk much about the harm caused. And the thing is, if one focuses on negative effects (like a.r.e.) some people will harass and try to silence you.

What do you call this? When people can't accept the truth? I think it's called people struggling with the DEATH OF THEIR IDEAL! IOW they can manage to navigate the final stage. Can't accept the truth when they can't handle the truth. Imagination and all things "spiritual" preferred. IMO another way of saying: "I don't like the truth so I have to 'imagine' a different one."

So maybe all those Eckankar leaders who came across the truth, they didn't know how to keep "their" Eckankar while discarding the fictions, lies and pseudo history at the same time. Instead they "imagined" a new ideal and called it "spiritual". (No plagiarism in The Far Country during Darwin's administration, etc.) Patti wrote her books like she knew what the seekers were thinking and what they wanted to hear. Just like Marman! Others called Paul Twitchell a master compiler, etc.

Maybe we just don't know all the dynamics about reasons why, but IMO that still does not make it right to plagiarize, not give credit, make up fictions, etc. For example, Who writes up the employment agreement forms for the LEMs? Who hires them? and if there is such an entity then maybe one needs to look at it / them? Harold evidently rebelled because Darwin had him as if on a string. It was the LEM who should be in charge according to THE WRITINGS!!!

According to the writings? According to the Shariyat? Imagine that!

Here is something Harold Klemp said after speaking at length about Paul Twitchell and his writings:

"Sometimes we've wondered, Where really is the foundation of ECK for me? And I'm telling you, it's not in the physical writings. It's always within, with the Light and Sound."

https://web.archive.org/web/20060721213332/https://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html

SOUND FAMILIAR?

And about the Shariyat:

"Paul encouraged people to read The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad and make their own study. He never said to take the words as holy, as the last word."

So this thread and some of the information on it fit together like beads on a string. IOW things go together. And especially things that actually happened along a timeline of history. Part of the reason for this thread is to establish true, actual really happened history from the pseudo and made up stuff. Some people maybe don't like it when I do this if it threatens their imaginary worlds of make believe, but I say not my problem. May Eckankar is a path where truth matters. And the truth about history. It may not be the Eckankar of Marman and others, but it's closer to the What Harold Klemp tried to describe about Death of an Ideal and The Real Foundation. I think because truth does matter and that is where Eckankar is headed, like it or not!

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage
RE "the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."
HORSE SHIT IT WAS ... more rationalisation and crap from Marman.
any ol' excuse is a good excuse. make up some MYTHS to cover up the MYTHS created by others ... what a dead shit excuse for a human being.
he's as thick as a door post

"Hey, in the 1960s everyone was lying about stuff and making shit up. Paul Twitchell had no other choice if he was going to compete.
This is why Darwin and Harold Klemp continued with that exact same course of action after everyone found it .. they kept using IE PLAGIARISING WITHOUT CREDIT other people texts to create more Eckankar Dogma and stuff .. ya see.?"
Oh hang about... does that even make sense?
Of course not, marman is was and always will be FULL OF SHIT and LIES and MANIPULATIONS ... it's his nature.
The great apologist!

This is the most interesting thing. One reason I created this thread title. The idea that people who know the truth continue not to fully clarify it, while other peoples lives are affected tremendously as a result.
I think myths can affect people lives in good ways and bad ways. Eckankar Inc. and Marman seem to highlight the good ways, but don't want to talk much about the harm caused. And the thing is, if one focuses on negative effects (like a.r.e.) some people will harass and try to silence you.
What do you call this? When people can't accept the truth? I think it's called people struggling with the DEATH OF THEIR IDEAL! IOW they can manage to navigate the final stage. Can't accept the truth when they can't handle the truth. Imagination and all things "spiritual" preferred. IMO another way of saying: "I don't like the truth so I have to 'imagine' a different one."
So maybe all those Eckankar leaders who came across the truth, they didn't know how to keep "their" Eckankar while discarding the fictions, lies and pseudo history at the same time. Instead they "imagined" a new ideal and called it "spiritual". (No plagiarism in The Far Country during Darwin's administration, etc.) Patti wrote her books like she knew what the seekers were thinking and what they wanted to hear. Just like Marman! Others called Paul Twitchell a master compiler, etc.
Maybe we just don't know all the dynamics about reasons why, but IMO that still does not make it right to plagiarize, not give credit, make up fictions, etc. For example, Who writes up the employment agreement forms for the LEMs? Who hires them? and if there is such an entity then maybe one needs to look at it / them? Harold evidently rebelled because Darwin had him as if on a string. It was the LEM who should be in charge according to THE WRITINGS!!!
According to the writings? According to the Shariyat? Imagine that!
"Sometimes we've wondered, Where really is the foundation of ECK for me? And I'm telling you, it's not in the physical writings. It's always within, with the Light and Sound."
https://web.archive.org/web/20060721213332/https://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html
SOUND FAMILIAR?
"Paul encouraged people to read The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad and make their own study. He never said to take the words as holy, as the last word."
So this thread and some of the information on it fit together like beads on a string. IOW things go together. And especially things that actually happened along a timeline of history. Part of the reason for this thread is to establish true, actual really happened history from the pseudo and made up stuff. Some people maybe don't like it when I do this if it threatens their imaginary worlds of make believe, but I say not my problem. May Eckankar is a path where truth matters. And the truth about history. It may not be the Eckankar of Marman and others, but it's closer to the What Harold Klemp tried to describe about Death of an Ideal and The Real Foundation. I think because truth does matter and that is where Eckankar is headed, like it or not!

A further note about Harold Klemps's Shariyat quote.

"Paul encouraged people to read The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad and make their own study. He never said to take the words as holy, as the last word."

https://web.archive.org/web/20060721213332/https://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html

I think one can read Paul Twitchell's introduction to the Shariyat and see for themselves exactly what he said / encouraged. Including this:

"[...] But altogether it is the whole truth (OMG! Really?), concise in all its parts and tells everyone what life really consists of and how to live it. [... .]"

Based on: Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1970) Third Printing - 1997, p. xiv - my brackets

Ahem! You don't say? And this was not Paul Twitchell writing as if everyone should read it as poetry. No! Because Paul Twitchell referenced history in his intro! IOW he spelled out a lot of history and a lot of PSEUDO HISTORY!

So if you ask me, Doug Marman and Harold Klemp are but two people in a group of people putting out similar narratives. They can't change what Twitchell did. They can't change what other people discovered and then told them that he did. Not because it's "spiritual truth", but because it IS THE TRUTH! The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is what Eckankar apologists can't make go away. It's on the path like the eternal next step that everybody eventually comes around to, and IMHO it's not up to a religion, a clergy or others to determine when that happens. No. The individual and their own relationship with spirit and truth, IOW their own path, determines that. If not, and Eckankar is gonna "take you" (as if along your own path) by keeping the truth from you until it (and its corporate interests) feels the time is right (for you to know the truth) then that is really not "freedom of religion". Is it?

Is it "freedom of religion" when Marman and others reinterpret people's relationships with spirit and truth to match their own? BECAUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE CONVERSION TO ME!

So is this a "my freedom of religion" against "your freedom of religion" kinda thing? Or is it a "my truth" vs. "your truth" vs. "the actual, verifiable, really happened kind of truth" thing?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Henosis Sage
RE "the creation of myth was still seen as a necessary requirement of most spiritual paths."
HORSE SHIT IT WAS ... more rationalisation and crap from Marman.
any ol' excuse is a good excuse. make up some MYTHS to cover up the MYTHS created by others ... what a dead shit excuse for a human being.
he's as thick as a door post

"Hey, in the 1960s everyone was lying about stuff and making shit up. Paul Twitchell had no other choice if he was going to compete.
This is why Darwin and Harold Klemp continued with that exact same course of action after everyone found it .. they kept using IE PLAGIARISING WITHOUT CREDIT other people texts to create more Eckankar Dogma and stuff .. ya see.?"
Oh hang about... does that even make sense?
Of course not, marman is was and always will be FULL OF SHIT and LIES and MANIPULATIONS ... it's his nature.
The great apologist!

This is the most interesting thing. One reason I created this thread title. The idea that people who know the truth continue not to fully clarify it, while other peoples lives are affected tremendously as a result.
I think myths can affect people lives in good ways and bad ways. Eckankar Inc. and Marman seem to highlight the good ways, but don't want to talk much about the harm caused. And the thing is, if one focuses on negative effects (like a.r.e.) some people will harass and try to silence you.
What do you call this? When people can't accept the truth? I think it's called people struggling with the DEATH OF THEIR IDEAL! IOW they can manage to navigate the final stage. Can't accept the truth when they can't handle the truth. Imagination and all things "spiritual" preferred. IMO another way of saying: "I don't like the truth so I have to 'imagine' a different one."
So maybe all those Eckankar leaders who came across the truth, they didn't know how to keep "their" Eckankar while discarding the fictions, lies and pseudo history at the same time. Instead they "imagined" a new ideal and called it "spiritual". (No plagiarism in The Far Country during Darwin's administration, etc.) Patti wrote her books like she knew what the seekers were thinking and what they wanted to hear. Just like Marman! Others called Paul Twitchell a master compiler, etc.
Maybe we just don't know all the dynamics about reasons why, but IMO that still does not make it right to plagiarize, not give credit, make up fictions, etc. For example, Who writes up the employment agreement forms for the LEMs? Who hires them? and if there is such an entity then maybe one needs to look at it / them? Harold evidently rebelled because Darwin had him as if on a string. It was the LEM who should be in charge according to THE WRITINGS!!!
According to the writings? According to the Shariyat? Imagine that!
"Sometimes we've wondered, Where really is the foundation of ECK for me? And I'm telling you, it's not in the physical writings. It's always within, with the Light and Sound."
https://web.archive.org/web/20060721213332/https://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html
SOUND FAMILIAR?
"Paul encouraged people to read The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad and make their own study. He never said to take the words as holy, as the last word."
So this thread and some of the information on it fit together like beads on a string. IOW things go together. And especially things that actually happened along a timeline of history. Part of the reason for this thread is to establish true, actual really happened history from the pseudo and made up stuff. Some people maybe don't like it when I do this if it threatens their imaginary worlds of make believe, but I say not my problem. May Eckankar is a path where truth matters. And the truth about history. It may not be the Eckankar of Marman and others, but it's closer to the What Harold Klemp tried to describe about Death of an Ideal and The Real Foundation. I think because truth does matter and that is where Eckankar is headed, like it or not!

A further note about Harold Klemps's Shariyat quote.
"Paul encouraged people to read The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad and make their own study. He never said to take the words as holy, as the last word."
https://web.archive.org/web/20060721213332/https://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html
"[...] But altogether it is the whole truth (OMG! Really?), concise in all its parts and tells everyone what life really consists of and how to live it. [... .]"
Based on: Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1970) Third Printing - 1997, p. xiv - my brackets
Ahem! You don't say? And this was not Paul Twitchell writing as if everyone should read it as poetry. No! Because Paul Twitchell referenced history in his intro! IOW he spelled out a lot of history and a lot of PSEUDO HISTORY!
So if you ask me, Doug Marman and Harold Klemp are but two people in a group of people putting out similar narratives. They can't change what Twitchell did. They can't change what other people discovered and then told them that he did. Not because it's "spiritual truth", but because it IS THE TRUTH! The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is what Eckankar apologists can't make go away. It's on the path like the eternal next step that everybody eventually comes around to, and IMHO it's not up to a religion, a clergy or others to determine when that happens. No. The individual and their own relationship with spirit and truth, IOW their own path, determines that. If not, and Eckankar is gonna "take you" (as if along your own path) by keeping the truth from you until it (and its corporate interests) feels the time is right (for you to know the truth) then that is really not "freedom of religion". Is it?
Is it "freedom of religion" when Marman and others reinterpret people's relationships with spirit and truth to match their own? BECAUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE CONVERSION TO ME!
So is this a "my freedom of religion" against "your freedom of religion" kinda thing? Or is it a "my truth" vs. "your truth" vs. "the actual, verifiable, really happened kind of truth" thing?

Marman, Rich, Jasmyn, J.R., Rob, Kinpa, Fife ... etc. What say you?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ

Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.

Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.

Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?

J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."

I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!

Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?

Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ
Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.
Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.
Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?
J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."
I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!
Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?
Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

this here ...However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]

is another example of Marman making stuff up out of thin air. Denying reality. Plagiarism was an issue (negative problem) for authors all through the 20th century. it wasn't just an academic issue, nor one about journalism.

Marman outright avoids in his whole truth (bullshit) book about Twitchell being busted for plagiarisng and copying verbatim in the flute of god chapters serial in orion magazine and subsequently being banned from further submissions.

Marman outright lies and covers up the truth all through his book, replacing reality with vapid opinions and cherrypicked factoids and excuses.

Twitchell lied about his age, he even broke the law on occasion doing so. Marman denies this happened.
Twitchell lied about sudar singh and paris france and graduating high school when 15 years .. but to a marman this is just Paul "having fun" ... much like paul travelling to london to save a chela from death was also paul just having fun. Stories about RT teaching him all about eckankar was also JUST PAUL just having fun.

................ at everyone else's expense. Doing so also sent many people over the edge. Harold over a bridge railing into icy waters, the classic example.

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ
Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.
Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.
Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?
J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."
I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!
Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?
Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

this here ...However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]
is another example of Marman making stuff up out of thin air. Denying reality. Plagiarism was an issue (negative problem) for authors all through the 20th century. it wasn't just an academic issue, nor one about journalism.
Marman outright avoids in his whole truth (bullshit) book about Twitchell being busted for plagiarisng and copying verbatim in the flute of god chapters serial in orion magazine and subsequently being banned from further submissions.
Marman outright lies and covers up the truth all through his book, replacing reality with vapid opinions and cherrypicked factoids and excuses.
Twitchell lied about his age, he even broke the law on occasion doing so. Marman denies this happened.
Twitchell lied about sudar singh and paris france and graduating high school when 15 years .. but to a marman this is just Paul "having fun" ... much like paul travelling to london to save a chela from death was also paul just having fun. Stories about RT teaching him all about eckankar was also JUST PAUL just having fun.
................ at everyone else's expense. Doing so also sent many people over the edge. Harold over a bridge railing into icy waters, the classic example.

"What your opinion is, and what my opinion is, really isn't that important. They might be important to us, but why is it important for us to broadcast what our opinion is?" - Doug Marman

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J

Doug's book(s) / YouTube videos are the broadcasting of his opinions?

Doug claimed he was comparing public criticism with open dialogue. However, Doug left the open dialogue here at a.r.e. many, many years ago.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ
Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.
Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.
Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?
J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."
I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!
Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?
Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

this here ...However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]
is another example of Marman making stuff up out of thin air. Denying reality. Plagiarism was an issue (negative problem) for authors all through the 20th century. it wasn't just an academic issue, nor one about journalism.
Marman outright avoids in his whole truth (bullshit) book about Twitchell being busted for plagiarisng and copying verbatim in the flute of god chapters serial in orion magazine and subsequently being banned from further submissions.
Marman outright lies and covers up the truth all through his book, replacing reality with vapid opinions and cherrypicked factoids and excuses.
Twitchell lied about his age, he even broke the law on occasion doing so. Marman denies this happened.
Twitchell lied about sudar singh and paris france and graduating high school when 15 years .. but to a marman this is just Paul "having fun" ... much like paul travelling to london to save a chela from death was also paul just having fun. Stories about RT teaching him all about eckankar was also JUST PAUL just having fun.
................ at everyone else's expense. Doing so also sent many people over the edge. Harold over a bridge railing into icy waters, the classic example.

"What your opinion is, and what my opinion is, really isn't that important. They might be important to us, but why is it important for us to broadcast what our opinion is?" - Doug Marman
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J
Doug's book(s) / YouTube videos are the broadcasting of his opinions?
Doug claimed he was comparing public criticism with open dialogue. However, Doug left the open dialogue here at a.r.e. many, many years ago.

"DOUG:

"You know, Lurk, the strangest thing about communication is that we always think it is the other people that aren't listening. It's never us.

"But I think you are also pointing out the same thing I was describing in society in general. People can feel the power coming down from above in an organization and feel threatened by it. Some people then express critical thoughts and contrary opinions as a defense.

"But open dialogue is different. Open dialogue is not a challenge to organizational authority, unless for some reason the organization is opposed to open dialogue. If communication is used as a weapon or as a battle to change things, then this is no longer open dialogue but has changed into something else."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ
Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.
Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.
Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?
J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."
I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!
Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?
Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

this here ...However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]
is another example of Marman making stuff up out of thin air. Denying reality. Plagiarism was an issue (negative problem) for authors all through the 20th century. it wasn't just an academic issue, nor one about journalism.
Marman outright avoids in his whole truth (bullshit) book about Twitchell being busted for plagiarisng and copying verbatim in the flute of god chapters serial in orion magazine and subsequently being banned from further submissions.
Marman outright lies and covers up the truth all through his book, replacing reality with vapid opinions and cherrypicked factoids and excuses.
Twitchell lied about his age, he even broke the law on occasion doing so. Marman denies this happened.
Twitchell lied about sudar singh and paris france and graduating high school when 15 years .. but to a marman this is just Paul "having fun" ... much like paul travelling to london to save a chela from death was also paul just having fun. Stories about RT teaching him all about eckankar was also JUST PAUL just having fun.
................ at everyone else's expense. Doing so also sent many people over the edge. Harold over a bridge railing into icy waters, the classic example.

"What your opinion is, and what my opinion is, really isn't that important. They might be important to us, but why is it important for us to broadcast what our opinion is?" - Doug Marman
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J
Doug's book(s) / YouTube videos are the broadcasting of his opinions?
Doug claimed he was comparing public criticism with open dialogue. However, Doug left the open dialogue here at a.r.e. many, many years ago.

"You know, Lurk, the strangest thing about communication is that we always think it is the other people that aren't listening. It's never us.
"But I think you are also pointing out the same thing I was describing in society in general. People can feel the power coming down from above in an organization and feel threatened by it. Some people then express critical thoughts and contrary opinions as a defense.
"But open dialogue is different. Open dialogue is not a challenge to organizational authority, unless for some reason the organization is opposed to open dialogue. If communication is used as a weapon or as a battle to change things, then this is no longer open dialogue but has changed into something else."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J

I suspect people can feel threatened by fiction taken (and publicly promoted) to be fact.

Pointing out actual historical really-happened-event truths vs. the never-really-happened event (except in one's imagination) truths is simply a defense of actual historical really-happened-event truths, IMHO.

Kinpa imagining people pooping in their pants and using that as a public criticism is probably what Doug was referring to when contrasting that with open dialogue. With open dialogue, people are afforded opportuning to defend the truth. This is likely the reason why Kinpa left a.r.e. in disgrace; or changed his name to remain anonymous.

"Have you already explained your motive and reasons for talking about assholes, shit, fire ants and all the rest? For making up lies about my membership card, etc.? You said it was none of my business? I told you it is my business and I will continue to ask about why you have done it; just like I keep asking about the copying and plagiarisms, wanting to talk about it here and explore it. [... .]"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/XUYp8GyZEJQ/m/1u8TMwu-AAAJ

Notice Kinpa's response to me. Suggesting that his made up malicious falsehoods were actually true.

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

One of the most heavily copied Eckankar books was The Far Country, Copyright 1970. Add this to the other trivia given thus far. Again, I think it bears repeating that a lot happened is just a couple short years in Eckankar history. Stranger by the River (with copied material) and Dialogues With The Master (also containing much appropriated material credited to Rebazar Tarzs; just like The Far Country) were copyright in 1970 too!
Remember the two terms I mentioned earlier? Look what appeared in an Eckankar book published in 1970.
[Rebazar Tarzs to Paul Twitchell] "[...] Remember all that has been told you. You are next in line for the spiritual mantle, to become the Mahanta, the living ECK Master.
This is all!"
[Based on: Dialogues with the Master, Original copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell; copyright transferred to ECKANKAR 1982, Eighth Printing - 1983, p. 238]
Those were the last two paragraphs in the book, BTW. In other words, the last paragraphs added before printing! Yes. A lot can happen in just two short years!

Paul Twitchell's widow married Paul Twitchell's successor (the same one she helped to become his successor) the year after (1972) Paul Twitchell died. By the end of 1973, it was Darwin Gross being referred to as Mahanta, the Living ECK Master.
(BTW. Everybody is invited to correct any errors or dates for the timeline being spelled out here. There are a lot of numbers I am trying to illustrate.)
In the 1970's decade, both Harold Klemp (the current Eckankar leader) and Doug Marman (Author of The Whole Truth) would work in the Eckankar office. Doug Marman would work close to Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp, the 2nd and 3rd modern-day Eckankar leaders.
By 1977 someone had to write a term paper on a new religious movement. Guess which one they chose? You guessed it. Eckankar!
"3. In the Spring of 1977 I [David Lane] took a class on religious cults and sects at California State University, Northridge, where I was majoring in religious studies. One of the requirements was to write a term paper on a new religious movement. I chose Eckankar as my topic of study, since they were (at that time) heavily advertising on campus. [...] "6. As the semester was coming to an end, I had to present my findings to my Professor. He was duly impressed, as was Jim Peebles (an Eckankar member at the time and my classmate), who was also writing a paper and who later left the group (he also got sued, by the way, the next year by Eckankar). 7. I was pretty naive, so I sent a copy of the report to Eckankar. Subsequently, I received a letter from one of their attorneys (Nichols), who threatened to sue me if I ever published my study."
[Based on: http://www.beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Occult/Misc/eckankar.txt]
Needless to say, Doug Marman would later debate David Lane at length. Both publicly online in this very group and in books he wrote on the subject. This thread, REVISITING "THE WHOLE TRUTH", Paul Twitchell & Eckankar, is designed to RELOOK at "findings" of David Lane and Doug Marman. More too the point, it hopes to outline what
A. Doug Marman knew
and
B. The way(s) that Doug Marman chose to communicate what he knew.
There is a reason for revisiting "THE WHOLE TRUTH" at this time. Can you guess why? No, not to begin a "poetry" contest, but one reason is to highlight the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

This next link has info 1970s dates when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp worked together together. Was that 1973 and 1974 when they met at the office? I think so. Early 70s then.
yes I did get to know Harold very
27:28
closely when I first started working at
27:31
the eckankar office in 73 actually he
27:35
showed up in 74 he started working there
27:37
we became close friends and I really
27:42
looked up to him
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/dRNtNDJMWlw/m/z_wS7VLFBwAJ

At this point I am trying to get an unbiased objective view about who knew what and when.
Evidently, according to previous post, Darwin Gross was Eckankar leader when Doug Marman and Harold Klemp became close friends; 1974, or thereabouts.
Something to note here is any official Eckankar admission of copying, or plagiarism. Was there any?
This would be the time period in about early 1970s, after Darwin Gross married Twitchell's widow. IMHO, Gail Twitchell Gross would have surely known about copying and plagiarism. That is, I think she could have known about "compiled" text appropriated to Rebazar Tarzs, seeing that Paul Twitchell once wrote that both he and Gail were visited by and had talked with him.
Also, Was there any official admission of copying and plagiarism during the whole time of Darwin Gross? What I saw publicly was no admission of plagiarism in The Far Country.
At this point I am checking notes to see what people had said. Including the following.
[...] Paul did not make all the decisions, he had a team of people who gave their input and ideas. These ideas were implemented only after all sides of the idea were discussed. [...] Using the persona of Rebazar was decided by Gail and a few top people in the organization. [...] Gail knew the devise that Paul used to create the concepts of the Eck Master, and the Mahanta. She knew how Paul had used others books to copy from in creating some of his works. But she also knew that Paul did this for a reason and that the only thing that really mattered was getting the Light and Sound into the consciousness of the world. Don't ever think that it did not bother her as to how it was done. [... .]"
[Based on: Soultraveler (Old TS) Post (Impressions of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar: Section 5 -The End of a Creation)
Previous links for that post are no longer working, so it will take some time to locate a working one. I think the greater context is necessary to read along with the sample I gave. In any case though, Did that Eckist person know what he was talking about? Is any of it true?

"[...] The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/Er0VHRTk_sc/m/NQYn-wQ00FIJ
Plagiarism aide, I think it also doesn't look good when one has to make up an imaginary master character and then not tell people about all the other made up things.
Because nowadays people are acting on that imaginary made up information to the point of making up new religions with the imaginary characters.
Rebazar Tarz is now the imaginary master character for at least Eckankar, Vardankar, Dhunami, NuWave and no telling how many others?
J.R. recently wrote: "Some of us--Eckankar members and not have met Sri Tarz in the flesh."
I also recall that A.T.O.M. members - who were formerly Eckankar members - saw Rebazar Tarzs and claimed that he told them Darwin was the real master and not Harold Klemp. Can anybody see how silly this is now? Imaginary characters can sday anything you want them to. Just go right ahead and imagine it. Marman might say it's a fiction truer than fact! But no. This is BONKERS! People are going off with the fairies and encouraging others to do the same! Even attacking personally those who try and ground the lot in the actual truth!
Someone challenged Marman many years ago. At least a couple here did, and many others besides that. Is Marman dialoging with them about this now? Has he been for years? What happened to his SDP Spiritual Dialogues Project bulletin board?
Whether Doug was an apologist poster boy for Paul Twitchell, plagiarism, made up fantasy, etc. I think many have found the answer to be a resounding YES! However I could do the same and defend fiction more truer than fact, if I was a patient in the NUT HOUSE! But people these days see right through the bunk. There are too many resources where people don't need to wait for a corporate spokesperson to come out with the truth.

this here ...However, it doesn't appear to have been much of a problem while Paul was alive. [... .]
is another example of Marman making stuff up out of thin air. Denying reality. Plagiarism was an issue (negative problem) for authors all through the 20th century. it wasn't just an academic issue, nor one about journalism.
Marman outright avoids in his whole truth (bullshit) book about Twitchell being busted for plagiarisng and copying verbatim in the flute of god chapters serial in orion magazine and subsequently being banned from further submissions.
Marman outright lies and covers up the truth all through his book, replacing reality with vapid opinions and cherrypicked factoids and excuses.
Twitchell lied about his age, he even broke the law on occasion doing so. Marman denies this happened.
Twitchell lied about sudar singh and paris france and graduating high school when 15 years .. but to a marman this is just Paul "having fun" ... much like paul travelling to london to save a chela from death was also paul just having fun. Stories about RT teaching him all about eckankar was also JUST PAUL just having fun.
................ at everyone else's expense. Doing so also sent many people over the edge. Harold over a bridge railing into icy waters, the classic example.

"What your opinion is, and what my opinion is, really isn't that important. They might be important to us, but why is it important for us to broadcast what our opinion is?" - Doug Marman
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J
Doug's book(s) / YouTube videos are the broadcasting of his opinions?
Doug claimed he was comparing public criticism with open dialogue. However, Doug left the open dialogue here at a.r.e. many, many years ago.

"You know, Lurk, the strangest thing about communication is that we always think it is the other people that aren't listening. It's never us.
"But I think you are also pointing out the same thing I was describing in society in general. People can feel the power coming down from above in an organization and feel threatened by it. Some people then express critical thoughts and contrary opinions as a defense.
"But open dialogue is different. Open dialogue is not a challenge to organizational authority, unless for some reason the organization is opposed to open dialogue. If communication is used as a weapon or as a battle to change things, then this is no longer open dialogue but has changed into something else."
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/uMYdE7ODgNY/m/kH0CNEiiMT4J

about this crap from Marman

"......unless for some reason the organization is opposed to open dialogue. If communication is used as a weapon or as a battle to change things, then this is no longer open dialogue but has changed into something else."

No kidding?
what a fucking manipulative lying JACKASS ...

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab
1970s
In 1970, Paul Twitchell wrote about The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Volume One. He also wrote a 2nd volume that same year.
"... the second volume takes up the symbolism of what we know as 'the book of coming forth by day.' [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS 1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail Twitchell Gross), p. 182]"
The earlier year Paul Twitchell mentioned the "living ECK Master" term (See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1969) and the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad (at 3rd WWS, Oct.-Nov. 1969). In February 1970, The "MAHANTA, the living ECK Master" term was used. [See Paul Twitchell Wisdom Note for February 1st, 1970.]
In short, the 1970 decade saw the beginnings of certain key Eckankar dogma (both of the Shariyats, oft referred to as Eckankar "bibles") along with the beginning of Eckankar as a non-profit religion [07/01/70). Of historical note is that Paul Twitchell's health would suffer that same summer and he would not live to the end of the following year (d. 09/17/71). IOW, a lot happened in just over two short years (fall 1969 - fall 1971).
The reason for introducing the 1970s decade is simple. It was a decade that saw allegations of plagiarism and also various other topics that Doug Marman would later address at length. I thought it necessary to introduce the beginning of the decade properly.

Revisiting "The Whole Truth"?

In certain respects I think some people (including Doug Marman especially) didn't really look at "the whole truth" so much as the whole "imaginary spiritual world of make-believe" which differs from person to person.

Making things up and distorting the truth is not what true actual, factual, accurate, verifiable history is, IMHO. Copying text from other people's books and assigning fictional characters for authors is not how REAL LIVING human being masters are created; at least, not according to the Julian Johnson books that Paul Twitchell appropriated and added Rebazar Tarzs and others to.

Why did Doug Marman (near the end of his book) ask readers to take what he wrote as all poetry? If Marman and Klemp and others knew / know that Paul Twitchell created fictional, not REALLY LIVING and never REALLY HAVING LIVED masters ... and if they knew this for decades already, then Why isn't there a book about it? Why not an Eckankar book explaining how a fictional being, or beings, equals LIVING master(s)? Along with why Twitchell did it.

Some wording in the narratives about Paul Twitchell from Marman, Klemp and others seem to give reasons why he copied and fictionalized things. However, there is still not a book telling everybody that so many LIVING masters before Twitchell were fictions.

When the next book comes along to revisit the whole truth about Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, I expect it will detail not only why it happened, but also what really happened, Who knew about it, How long did they know about it, and What did they do (or not do) about it.