ex-l wrote:Jim says the Tao of the Traveller has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BKWSU and the information is unique to the authors/writers/editors etc.
This has never been clained by anyone except you in this post. Naughty!!!!
The Knowledge is God's and no one ever claimed otherwise.
Just for the sake of accuracy, what I said was that Ideas and philosophies and points of view and beliefs could NOT BE COPYRIGHT. What is copyright is the way the ideas are expressed ... i.e. the writing. You could read eight different pieces of writing on love and the ideas would be the same but the writing iss different. otgerwise there wuld beno writers. How could you compare the style of Shakespeare to the stye of Wordsworth. The way they express the ideas is copyright. Just as an example, here are two quotes that say the same thing.
Shakespeare wrote:“There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries".
Napoleon Bonaparte wrote:“Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in.”
Reading these two, one can plainly see the difference in the way the ideas are epresed. That is what is copyright.
And before you do what you usually do and make some slurring crack, I have used Shakepeare and Bonaparte not because I am likening them in any way to 'Traveller' or comparing them in any way, I use them because they are people famous in history who will be recognized by most.
OK, Jim, I am asking you personally now - not the BKWSU - which part of the following in NOT BK Gyan or BKWSU related and which part is unique and copyrightable by Barbara Ramsay?
The writing, the way the beliefs are expressed is copyright. Writers, write about what they believe in, unless they are writing fiction. This is one of the main reasons for writing. You seem to insinuate that there is something wrong with this. That a writer, having found what they believe to be truth, should somehow be barred from writing it. It does make me wonder where you were when they were burning books in Germany, or forming bodies of men to censor other peoples thought and words.
I am actually not condemning here ... I am asking "why?" the cover up or disassociation from Brahma Kumaris?
Again the only person who sees a 'cover up' as you call it is you. What I said, again for the sake of accuracy, is that in the book and in the film there are none of the things that make these pieces exclusively BK. The things expressed are the universal truths from God and they appear in many religions and spiritual paths. There in no mention of 'Baba' or 'BapDada' or 'Dadis' or 'Krishna' or "5000 year cycle" or Murlis or Madhuban or the BWSU.
The writing is not old Murlis or meditation commentaries. It is not copied from anyone else and is copyright.
I would hazard a guess that the writer having found spiritual inspiration wanted to share that with as much of the world is reachable. That's what writing is.
Here is an animated version with Robin and Barbara Ramsay. Barbara gets the credit for being the writer and not the BKWSU. Is it a authorised cover or is it deceptive?
She is the writer and not the BKWSU. It is not a 'cover'. I assume you mean a cover for somehow getting people to become BK's. The book, the film and whatever this animation is do not seek to get people into centres or to convert people into BK-ism.
ex-l wrote:Amongst mention of "losing soul consciousness" and imagery of a bindi soul traveling up to Bindi Shiv, I quickly noted the following."Gosh, can I really be a sage too?" "Yes, child. Whatever is mine is yours"
(apparently there is no place for Equal Opportunities casting in the BKWSU ... Its a Family Affair).
What you quoted there doesn't come from the book, the film or the animation. You've either made it up or gotten it somewhere else. And just on the subject of your last statement, Why on earth should professionals who worked together before Gyan, stop working together afterwards. Should they rush about finding non professional Brahmins to work with instead. Should you have been in the film, or would you have been able to direct it or shoot it?
Barbara Ramsay allegedly wrote:The traveller is the diamond spark ... the soul ...
the traveller is the jewel between the eyes ...
the traveller is you ...
Oh nice touch, that 'allegedly'. How nasty. Again I say, it is the way the ideas are expressed. The actually way the words are strung together that make it copyright.
And to answer another objection you have ... why is the film not free to download. To get a definitive answer you must ask the people directly involved. However, I will answer assuming that I understand a little more about the process than you do as I have been allied with the industry in the past.
Making a film is hard and time consuming and takes a few years. With all the care spent on camera angles and lighting and locations etc. filmmakers do not want peope to see their film on a three inch space on a computer screen. So much is lost and all that effort goes for not very much.
Also once something has been free to download it is no longer eligible for cinemas or film festivals. It is true that many people download things from the net but there are also people who don't. The film is for them too, so first in the cinemas and festivals and then afterwards, when those people have had the opportunity then perhaps it can be free to download. It has to be done the right way round to make the best use of it and get the most out of it. Free on the internet first precludes anything else from being done with it
I hope this has answered your questions. Stay well. And be nice! You'll be happier. Jim