XPost: alt.religion.eckankar, alt.meditation.shabda, alt.revisionism   
   XPost: alt.conspiracy   
   From: nobody@verizon.net   
      
   > It seems that the semantics of how others interpret "master" is an issue   
   > I've seen in many apostates... can you share what it is in _yourself_ that   
   > caused your "slave" reaction in this post?'   
      
   Rich, my experiences were with Gopal Das back in the mid 60's through mid   
   1970 (actually they still continue today).  When I first called him 'master'   
   he immediacy repudiated me by saying that he was "not" my master. (He was   
   very adamant about his.)  That I have no need of a master nor should I ever   
   accept anyone as such.  He told me that any person who called himself   
   'master', placed themselves over the other and that was regarded as a sign   
   of a false teacher. (This was not exactly what he stated, but that's the   
   closest I can remember it.) When I asked what relationship we shared, he   
   told me to think of him as a teacher. When I asked him if he was my guide,   
   he said no, and told me the name of my guide (and took me to meet her   
   later.)   
      
   I realize that this view is not regarded as being popular in the group of   
   Eckists (as the head honcho refers to himself as a living "master"), but I'm   
   a pragmatist and I still see it as having significance for myself. I knew   
   many others who also felt uncomfortable thinking of a living man as a   
   "master'. (I would imagine that all of them have left Eckankar by now.)  For   
   me, if you tell me your a 'master', then stop talking about it and prove it.   
   Words are easy and cheap.  Or -dating myself- "blow in my ear and I'll   
   follow you anywhere".   
   Dennis   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)