(This post will be somewhat different, as it comes
without having read the posts for today first.)
I was thinking how the one is often the antithesis
of the other. Personal experience vs. organized re-
ligion. It led me to contemplate how Eckankar was
different years ago and what might have made it so
appealing then vs. now.
Without speaking for the experiences of others, I
can only share what were my own. And back when
I heard about Eckankar in the 80s, the appeal had
mostly to do with how different it was from organized
religion as I knew it.
Much of what I learned was new. Not altogether
foreign, but a lot of what I read seemed to go much
father at explaining the facets of a spiritual path. It
was the experiences of others that helped commun-
icate a lot of this. People were free to share what
were their own personal experiences. Aside from
those written in the books.
In 1987 I joined before there was a formal Wor****p
Service. We sat in circles and the main format was
in the form of Roundtable Discussion for sharing be-
tween others. Spiritual exercises were encouraged
as a means toward experiencing the principles for
oneself. Not that these facets are not still a part of
the path I know by the name of Eckankar, but the
tensions between personal experience and organ-
ized religion seem greater today, IMO.
Eckankar was not so much "organized religion"
in the beginning, IMO. Rather, it was how the path
differed from organized religion that made it special.
So today when I considered how "inner" and "outer"
are different, the words that came to me were per-
sonal experience and organized religion.
IMO, it doesn't matter whether the one matches
the other exactly. Whether a spiritual path that is
founded on personal experience matches exactly
the outer recored history of organized religion by
the same name. The organization, the trappings,
format and guidelines are not always the result of
one personal experience. Many times they are the
conglomerate of a group and what is deemed best
for the greater whole. Sometimes a religion will by
vote elect certain facets in spite of others that had
a lesser vote. Personal choices begin to oppose
other personal choices in the name of organized
religion, IMO. Eventually the outer structure of
what is essentially a path of personal spiritual
experience begins to limit and eclipse what may
amount to the sum total of every member's ex-
perience combined. Even the personal experience
of the "founder" and the way they knew the path
can get revised and edited by the thoughts, op-
inions and ideas of others. Things which may not
every time meet with opposition by the founder.
Especially since a "religion" illustrates only an
imperfect outer representation of inner personal
experience and actual (vs. imperfectly recorded)
history.
Judging every member belonging to organized
religion based upon the imperfect outer garment
over an inner personal experience is misleading,
IMO. A religion cannot represent the voice or the
choice of every member. And besides that, the
form of the outer representation may not even
match the actual history which it appears to
represent. Not when religion is marketed like a
product and the image designed in a way to make
it attractive by adding things that appeal to the
most people. I mean things that other religions
include, but that are not always founded on the
truth. If you want an idea what I'm talking about,
it can be spelled out in seven words: HISTORY!
Not an organized religion with ancient roots
today (IMO) matches the actual history of its
earlier days. Including the message and the
personal experience of its founder in every way.
Neither may it match or perfectly represent the
experience of its every member.
How do we know today what the experiences
of earlier Christians were like? Or Jews, Muslims,
Buddhists, Hindus, Chinese and Native Americans,
etc.? Especially when based upon only a partial
(albeit biased) image of what remains?
Probably the one thing that has taken the most
years to come to grips with - in my experience of
it - is that "Eckankar" is both an inner personal
experience and an outer organized religion.
Today it is, perhaps, more challenging than it
was years ago. Because it was the "inner" reality
and the personal experience of it that drew me to
Eckankar. That was the message of Eckankar as
I saw it. It didn't matter so much if the lineage of
masters fit an actual history then, but it was the
message that was more im****tant. It was what
was being said, or hinted at, that mattered. And
I had the freedom to believe any of it or not, with-
out the fear of "ex-communication".
When I look to verify and substantiate what
history there is for Eckankar today, I don't see
a complete match between the actual events
and what people wrote - or decided to write -
about it. In this respect it might seem like one
is the antithesis to the other, though not entirely.
The word versus means "opposed to or against".
The modern definition, at least. However, it would
appear to also indicate the idea of a "turn", IMO.
Something that happens when a person does a
double take, and looks back and forth between the
image of personal vs. outer organized experience
on a spiritual path. One may be your own, and an-
other may not. One may be the truth, and the other
an imperfect representation. And with regard to the
actual history of events in the "outer" world, what is
recorded might be only a partial representation and
not the whole picture, IMO.
Does one depend on the other? What is personal
experience and organized religion? It didn't seem to
be that way in the beginning, as I remember it. Now
I ask myself why does the one seem to depend on
the other today? I suspect it's because the two are
somehow linked. Somehow. Don't expect me to de-
scribe how everybody else will come to grips with
these two ideas though. I can only understand it
the best as it pertains to my own experience. The
two are connected in some way, IMO, and getting
rid of one entirely seems like somehow getting rid
of both. Something I wouldn't want to do - as both
appear to contain parts of the truth.
Etznab
|
