The Brahma Kumaris: Spiritualism and Channeling

for ex-BKs to discuss matters related to experiences in BKWSU & after leaving.
  • Message
  • Author
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Channel in English

Post22 Jun 2006

arjun wrote:Dear Uddhava, Omshanti. Could you please explain what is 'channelling' from your point of view or the view of the outside world? Then we can present our views.

There has been some discussion about the nature of chanelling and how it relates to Raj Yoga practise. On the one hand, there is the 'classic' chanelling of Shiva through his 'chariots', a higher soul from a spiritual using the body of another soul to present a message to this earthly realm. On the other hand, there may be a second form of chanelling which is where the passive recipient does not act as a direct medium for the soul that is being chanelled, e.g. talking, hearing, acting as a Chariot but only act a conduit or channel for that other soul's vibrations, energy, light etc.

With many so called 'chanellers', it would seem that they are merely suffering from spirit possession, to some degree a victim to another spirit entity which often turns out to be controlling, dishonest and manipulative. Such are documentation, here; http://www.paraview.com/fisher/index.htm

Others claim to be collaborators with high minded spirits, and those spirits give out Universal and beneficial messages, here to help humanity. It could be argued that Shiva is one of the later. I think I asked you in another forum what Shiva's view of the other chanelled entities are.

The word "entity" is often used because it is not clear *what* is being channelled. It may be a human soul, it might be claimed that the being was a non-human alien intelligence, a vaguely defined 'Consciousness' an Angel, someone from the past or future - or indeed a group of souls. And, obviously, it is impossible to prove anything one way or another apart from listening to the entities own testimony.

In a sense, chanelling might be thought of as a benign possession, the mechanism by which weak or evil souls 'possess' others being the same. The only difference between the two being the quality of the soul and its intent.

Within the discussion of chanelling, there is the sub-text of what within Raj Yoga is the difference between meditation and chanelling, e.g. when is it that are we meditating and when is it that we or our egos stepping out of the way, or outside of our bodies, to allow Shiva to chanelled energy through us.

Lastly, there is another subtle distinction made between chanelling and "being overshadowed". This is a term used by another spiritualist here; http://www.share-international.org/arch ... oteric.htm

Overshadowing would sound much like the manner you state in which ShivBaba or Brahma Baba use or protect BK's. It is not chanelling in that the chanelled entity/spirit does not come and speak but is merely present through the astral body of the medium. Interestingly, that man also teaches that Christ and Master Jesus are separate in the way Shiva teaches and states that the latter is looking after his religion.

I make no claims of faith or belief in all this but just present it as documentation of a widespread phenomenon within which the Shiva experience has to be related.

Obviously, the BKWSU eradicate and avoid any discussion of any such events and there is a whole science of psychism and subtle bodies that is ignored because, a) it is of little benefit to understand, b) it is distraction from 'higher' knowledge and c) it might raise difficult question for the BKs just who is doing what to whom when Gulzar channels who ever it is she is chanelling.

I would argue that Gulzar was a chaneller. We have no way of knowing whom it is she is chanelling and there would seem to be no explanation of why the entity she is chanelling is of such a different personality from that whom spoke the Sakar Murlis through Lekhraj Kirpalani; except the party line that Gulzar is not pure enough. That to me would not explain the change in personality of the channelled entity.
Chanelling: Understanding Chanelling By India Times

Chanelling is a process whereby an individual (the 'medium') claims to have invoked a spirit entity, which speaks through the medium. Instead of contacting departed loved-ones, the entities contacted are usually guides, masters, aliens, or angels. The information may not have a great impact, but the source seems to hold more weight or, at least, provide a different perspective.

Many mediums channel the same entity or entities repeatedly. These entities being channeled often discuss a particular spiritual subject imparting their knowledge and wisdom.

Chanelling is a skill that can be developed by anyone with the desire and determination to reach upwards and grow spiritually. It does not take years of special training but does require the ability to make one's mind calm and free of thoughts and the ability to trust and surrender.

In the ancient days the Oracles at Delphi, priestesses and priests of the temples, psychics, seers, witch doctors and shamans were the channelers of energies from archetypes to nature spirits to their own spirit guides.

All civilisations and cultures had one form or another of mystics or trance channelers, who provided services with their abilities to tap into different dimensions and bring through The Knowledge, which the masses were untrained to do themselves. And the shamans and priests have kept this art form alive until this day when it can now be utilized by almost anyone, whenever they desire. Ancient Egypt is often thought of as the beginning of trance Chanelling as a mode of communication with the spirits of the dead.

In many cultures mediums were highly regarded, treated with great respect, and given honors. Christianity is based on the teachings of a man who claimed both to be God and a medium to channel God. For example, we find in the New Testament, scenes as Jesus raising Jarius' daughter (Mark 5:39-40) or Lazarus (John 11:39-44), or summoning up of the spirits of Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration (Luke 9:28-36) - or, for that matter, God raising Jesus himself on the third day (Matt 28:9, Luke 24:13-16, John 20:11-18 )

Jesus seems to have charged his followers as well with the power to channel spirits: "For it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak," he tells the apostles at one point. "For it is not ye that speak, but the spirit of your Father that speaketh in you." (Matt 10:20) Saul channels the dead Jesus on the road to Damascus, and is struck blind; when he regains his vision he converts to Christianity and becomes its most powerful prophet, Paul.

John of Patmos describes his vision in the Book of Revelation specifically as channeled: "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying..." (Rev 1:10) Chanelling is for those people who wish to enrich and develop the wisdom of their higher selves. It is not an easy method of solving all of your daily and emotional problems overnight.

Miracles do happen, but a guide will 'guide' you in finding your own solutions through helping you to see the variety of options you have in your decision-making processes. Channelling is not to be confused with the intention to contact the dead or to seek their assistance and guidance. Those who have passed on are in the astral plane, and generally have the same fears, opinions and characteristics of souls in body here on Earth. They often lack the higher and broader perspective that a high-level guide will have.

The aim of Channelling is to attract a high-level teacher guide that has as his/her highest purpose, your spiritual growth and well being.

Mediums

Mediums are primarily those who through certain techniques enter into a trance-like state and then invoke the presence of souls from the netherworld; the netherworld referring to the land of astral beings. Mediumship or Channelling is quickly taking root more in the Western world than in the eastern; though it has been silently practiced in the Orient too for hundreds of years.

There is a subtle barrier between the physical world and the world of spirit. A medium is one who penetrates the very fine veil separating the two and manages to make a connection with those on the 'far' side. A medium is often also referred to as a 'sensitive,' and is one who generally aspires to bring information and advice to those still living on the earth plane as a means to solve problems or answer their questions, and at times, also to bring in teachings of exalted beings to those who wish to hear them. Like a 'psychic,' the medium is naturally sensitive to energies, many of which may go unheeded by the majority, but unlike with an ordinary psychic, a desire to transcend the mundane spurs the would-be medium, who through much learning and meditation begins to identify emanations coming from discarnate dimensions.

Mediums are looked upon as unique beings, oft attributed with special spiritual development and as individuals who receive favours from God. However, this could not be more further from the truth. Ability to enter into a trance and be possessed by another soul is hardly the yardstick for spiritual depth. While many phenomena have definitely taken place - even under stringent scientific observation - these are only reflective of certain powers acquired. And power, is not necessarily an indicator of anything that is saintly. The techniques, moreover, can be fairly easily learned and developed upon. The neo-west is clustered with a plethora of people from age 15 to 75 who are fast becoming self-anointed psychic mediums. Yet how few are aware of the dangers too that can be involved in 'medium ship.'

Genuine spiritualism as an intense, invigorating science lets us know that there is life beyond this gross world and that our loved ones do continue to live on, though their physical body has been shed. But modern practices - what we term 'advancements in the present era' - have distorted the meaning of the real search for knowledge of the spirit world. Deluded by their own imaginations many so called mediums (with a few exceptions) having a little intellectual understanding become victims of their own subconscious, or worse still, become possessed by disembodied tramp souls seeking a human vehicle.

Mediums sit in seances to answer questions born of imploring and needy minds. A medium might claim to be able to talk with your grandma or maybe even your eternal beloved whose life was snatched away under mysterious circumstances. Questions that have left you flummoxed find the pearl of their answers in the sea of the 'omniscient' medium. "Where is the key to the locker?" "Will I manage to win the beauty pageant?" "Should I marry this guy I am seeing?" "Is Grandpa doing well in heaven?" Frequently the invoked soul partly takes over the consciousness of the medium and even the answers to your questions pour forth in the invited soul's earthly voice!!!

While medium ship is a definite fact, we must realize through our own divine wisdom that the answers to certain questions are beyond the purview and scope of the invoked souls and hence, also of the mediums. This is particularly true of subjective queries such as "Would I be happy if the two of us got married?" Mediums need to educate members in a seance that a soul in the netherworld retains almost the same level of understanding and wisdom as it had when it exited the last earthly incarnation. Entry into the so-called hall of heaven does not suffuse the soul with newfound wisdom and glory that can be channelled sagaciously to counsel the not-more-not-less fortunate brethren. The bugle call of death does not convert one into an angel!!!

Mediums are different from clairvoyants. While the medium invokes the presence of a spirit soul through various techniques, the clairvoyant is primarily able to intuitively perceive your subtle states and thereby also see your aura (the reflection of colour emanating from your subtle astral body of light). This becomes feasible because the clairvoyant is able to attune the power of the life force in his sight to certain finer rates of vibration than those that are normally perceived by the physical eyes.

Again, simply being able to perceive colours is not indicative of spiritual depth. It takes an understanding of many sciences to become a good holistic healer. Similarly, acquisition of a power (everything is ultimately a gift from God) and the silent nurturing of wisdom from the depths within can be very different issues. Clairvoyance is not detrimental to spiritual progress; in the clairvoyant state one's consciousness is reversed from the plane of matter to the plane of Spirit. Clairvoyance is a consequence of a highly developed intuitive faculty; mediumship is not.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post22 Jun 2006

howiemac wrote:There is no sound in the Subtle Regions, so can be no words or conversation as we know it - it is all done by telepathy and visions ...

Idle sophistry, I know, but that raises the question, what is sound or how is it made. The resonance of matter impressed upon by the mind/spirit ?

Then where does the sound of the universe and planets come from? The ringing of what is collective human souls through the material Universe? Or are we all wrong and science have the answers?

So how do clairvoyant mediums and their guides work? Perhaps they are not in the Subtle Regions and wherever they are has sound.

So if there is a somewhere else, e.g. where Brahma is by the PBK line, why cannot 'god' Shiv communicate from or through there?
User avatar

uddhava

ex-BK

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post23 Jun 2006

howiemac wrote:Dadi Gulzar is a trance messenger - as understand it the Bhog messages are trance messages. There is no sound in the Subtle Regions, so can be no words or conversation as we know it - it is all done by telepathy and visions, and through this very clear "messages" can be given - the trance messengers have to put their experiences into their own words, which obviously leaves plenty room for misunderstanding/manipulation etc.. I guess this is a major reason why the process of trance messaging has been discouraged since the 1960s.

Dear Howie Mac,

OK so DG is a trance messenger, but can I just clarify do you mean that the Avyakt Vani is done via trance messaging, so the Chariot is a special type of trance messenger? Also there is another thread about this but do you think the term 'channelling' is OK for what happens in the Sakar Murli / Avyakt Vani?
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Post24 Jun 2006

Uddhava wrote:Wow the first ever Avyakt Murli - I would love to see this. Is it still available or has it disappeared? Does anyone know when in 1969 it arrived, how soon after January 18?

Howeimac has produced the relevant Avyakt Vani in English. However, I would like to add that the following para of that AV, dtd 21.1.69 is related to the role of trance messengers before and after Brahma Baba left his body.

"Abhi ek aur baat aap sabkey dhyaan par dey rahey hain – BapDada kee last Murli may jo shiksha mili hai ki yah dhyaan deedaar jyaada chalaana samay vyarth ganvaana hai.Isliye yah nahee hona chaahiye. Aisey na ho sandeshiyon dwara center par jo part chaley usay aap check na kar paao. Isliye yah nimitt banee hui Didi aur Kumarka jis sandeshi ko mukarrar karegi unho ke dwara direction milengey, is part ke liye bhi yah jisko nimitt banaayengi, us dwara hee rahasya spashta hongey. Jaisey pichaadi kee Murli may yah bhi direction tha ki Bhog ke samay baikunth aadi may jaana vyarth samay gavaana hai. kyunki yah ghoomna-firnaa ab shobhtaa nahee."

" Your attention is being drawn to one more thing, that is the teachings you received in the last Murli that BapDada spoke, about having too many visions and going into trance being a waste of time. That should not happen. It shouldn't be that you are not able to verify the parts being played by the trance messengers at the centres. This is why you will receive directions through whichever trance messenger Didi and Kumarka, who are the instruments, appoint as instruments. For this part also the significance will be clarified by whoever they make the instrument. In the last Murli there was the direction that to go into heaven at the time of offering Bhog is a waste of time, because that is not the time to be wandering around."

I think apart from Gulzar Dadi, Mohini Bhen is also an official trance messenger. Whenever Gulzar Dadi is not at Madhuban (Mount Abu) it is Mohini Bhen only who brings the trance messages.
Uddhava wrote:OK so what happened to the ones that were not selected - do they still get messages from God but not publicise them or do they refrain from using their gift?

During my several years as a BK I witnessed many trance messengers among the BKs, some official, some not official. I even saw children being sent into trance en-masse by Mohini bhen on the Baba's rock at Mount Abu. Some of those children continued to have divine visions later on even without the help of Mohini bhen.

I agree with one of the members who said that the part of trance messages through unofficial trance messengers was discontinued in the mid nineties. But I know about one or two trance messengers who would still go to trance whenever they wish. May be that is their special role in drama. Anyways, this whole process is controlled by BapDada and not in the capacity of the individuals.

With regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

howiemac

ex-BK

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2006
  • Location: Scotland

Post24 Jun 2006

arjun wrote:I think apart from Gulzar Dadi, Mohini Bhen is also an official trance messenger. Whenever Gulzar Dadi is not at Madhuban (Mt. Abu) it is Mohini Bhen only who brings the trance messages.

This is my understanding too. Also, Shashi bhen is an official trance messenger - I witnessed her do the Bhog messaging twice in 2004 on Thursday morning class at Universal Peace Hall in Madhuban. So the trance messenging has clearly not been discontinued in the mid '90s as stated by others...
Uddhava wrote:OK so DG is a trance messenger, but can I just clarify do you mean that the Avyakt Vani is done via trance messaging, so the Chariot is a special type of trance messenger? Also there is another thread about this but do you think the term 'channelling' is OK for what happens in the Sakar Murli / Avyakt Vani?

I am no expert in psychic terminology, but i understand BapDada speaking through Gulzar as channeling, similar to the process of 'conducting' used in BK centres everywhere, but more absolute, as the "Chariot" is completely taken over (temporarily) by the channeling entity. I would say Gulzar is acting as a medium, in traditional spiritualist fashion. To me trance messenging (in BK terminology anyway) is the process whereby the messenger goes to the Subtle Region and comes back and relates their experiences.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post25 Jun 2006

arjun wrote:I even saw children being sent into trance en-masse by Mohini Bhen on the Baba's rock at Mount Abu. Some of those children continued to have divine visions later on even without the help of Mohini Bhen.

What did the children see or do? By "afterwards", do you means days after?
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Post26 Jun 2006

What did the children see or do? By "afterwards", do you means for days after?

The children used to see the scenes of heaven and most of them used to cry for hours after coming back from that experience. Some continued to have these trance experiences later on also, i.e. after some days.

I knew of a friend (a male BK child), who started having these trance experiences even after returning to his home town and the sister-in-charge of his center would ask him to sit in trance on the Thursdays, the official day for offering Bhog to ShivBaba/Brahmababa among BKs. But that role continued only for a few weeks and then discontinued. I have not been in touch with that friend since many years. So I do not know if he had any such experience later on also.

With regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

john

reforming BK

  • Posts: 1563
  • Joined: 03 May 2006
  • Location: UK

Post26 Jun 2006

Arjun wrote:Anyways, this whole process is controlled by BapDada and not in the capacity of the individuals.

What do you mean by this and who do you mean by BapDada?
User avatar

uddhava

ex-BK

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post26 Jun 2006

Dear howiemac,

OK so you mean that all chariots can be trance messengers but not all trance messengers can be chariots, in other words the Chariot is the more specialised role.
howiemac wrote:I am no expert in psychic terminology, but i understand BapDada speaking through Gulzar as channeling, similar to the process of 'conducting' used in BK centres everywhere, but more absolute, as the "Chariot" is completely taken over (temporarily) by the channeling entity. I would say Gulzar is acting as a medium, in traditional spiritualist fashion.

You mention DG but would you say that Brahma Baba was doing the same medium / channelling job?
To me trance messenging (in BK terminology anyway) is the process whereby the messenger goes to the Subtle Region and comes back and relates their experiences.

Maybe it is a bit confusing to call this messenging because 'message' suggests the conveying of particular words. Or maybe trance messenging involves speaking about the experience afterwards, whereas some people may go to the Subtle Regions in their meditation but not necessarily speak about their experience or call it trance messenging.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post26 Jun 2006

Uddhava wrote:Maybe it is a bit confusing to call this messaging because 'message' suggests the conveying of particular words. Or maybe trance messaging involves speaking about the experience afterwards, whereas some people may go to the Subtle Regions in their meditation but not necessarily speak about their experience or call it trance messaging.

One can have a 'visual message', life is fully of them. Most high quality advertisements, for example, are entirely visual messages, and some quite complex; at the other end of the scale plants and animals give off very clear instinctual visual messages.

Sure the BK messengers convey the messages in language. Shame they did not teach or encourage some of the artists within the fold to have trance messages so that they could draw, paint or envisage them more directly. But, my guess is the Institution would not like that as it would undercut their stranglehold on the iconography " The Message" [TM]. If kids can have visions, why not artists?

I mean, it is amazing that they did not think about it. Imagine if word got out that Deities did not look like fat Bollywood starts and the Golden Age was not all gilt baubles, square gardens and dolphin shaped gold bathtaps.

One of the Brothers in the bhavan I lived in had a 'real' vision one evening. It was really funny. There is no way he could have faked it. It certainly was not one of those " Baba gave the soul a vision ... " fake Bhog messages about some idea that wandered into the Sister's head when she sat there day dreaming.

He left the sitting room to go to bed, opened the door to his room and took one step in. Stopped dead in his tracks and then 20, 30 seconds later stumbled back into the living room and almost fell into the sofa, his eye wide like saucers and his jaw dropped like something out of a cartoon.

" I have just had a vision of heaven ... " was all that he could say. Funny thing was, he could not lift his head up to look, all he could see was the grass and flowers and light at his feet. " He was really quite rough but very sincere and genuine. Irish.

No message, no meaning; just thought I would chuck it into the pot to raise questions about how this stuff works?

When you say souls " go to Subtle Region ", what do you mean? Something notional, or something real? I have to say that I never did, I never left the seat of my pants - or at least head and neck.

If we relate this to experiences had by other mystics had, like Emanuel Swedenborg or modern day mediums, there was often speech involved. Interesting too, many folk relate masters revealing themselves to them in physical like bodies does this happen to BKs, with Brahma Baba or some dead Dadi dropping into to see them?
User avatar

howiemac

ex-BK

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2006
  • Location: Scotland

Post26 Jun 2006

Uddhava wrote:OK so you mean that all chariots can be trance messengers but not all trance messengers can be chariots, in other words the Chariot is the more specialised role.

well, yes - though i see no good reason why others could not act also as Chariot - as i understand it this was implied by BapDada in that first Avyakt Murli - but Gulzar was the 'Chariot' for that first Murli - was she 'chosen' by BapDada, or simply the first to open herself up in the right way to let the channelling happen? i have no idea....
You mention DG but would you say that Brahma Baba was doing the same medium / channelling job?

This is a very interesting and relevant question. Clearly the process for Brahma Baba is different - he is conscious when speaking the Murlis, and indeed his own words are interspersed with Shiva's, in a way that still causes confusion... I see Brahma Baba's channelling as more akin to the process of 'conducting' than is Gulzar's, because he remains conscious, while Gulzar's mind takes no part in the BapDada performance.

It does seem that in channelling in general there are two recognised forms of channelling - conscious channelling (eg Brahma Baba) and trance channelling (eg Edgar Cayce, Gulzar). Conscious channelling is far more common and is not considered "clean" channelling, as the conscious medium can edit the messages at will. Of course, with Avyakt BapDada we have both forms operating together - at least in this case the conscious channelling is being done by an angelic being - Brahma Baba is in his perfect form, so can presumably be trusted more than he could when still corporeal and imperfect - this is why I trust Avyakt Murlis above Sakar Murlis.

But Brahma Baba is not God and so to claim that the Murlis are the words of God is innaccurate - even accepting Shiva as God, the words are spoken by Brahnma Baba, consciously, and Shiva's input and influence is mixed with Brahma Baba's own - hence what we get is very much a product of Brahma Baba's world view, and worldy experience - and the words of the Murli are aimed primarily at achieving Brahma Baba's own personal agenda - at fulfiling his role of leader of the Brahma Kumaris (and Kumars). This is why the Murlis have such a bias towards organisational matters, growing and nurturing the organisation. I am convinced that Shiva couldn't care less about such organisational matters - they are beneath him/her.

Brahma Baba has to put Shiva's ideas into words, as Shiva is way beyond words and language, never taking any physical body - the closest s/he gets is through Brahma Baba acting as mouthpiece. I would contend that others could do this same "mouthpiece" job just as easily as Brahma Baba, though it is debatable whether Shiva chooses to use others to speak through as well (eg Virendra Dev Dixit, or other BKs or indeed non-BKs) - I am saying this could happen, not that it does (i do not know). But I am convinced, from personal experience, that Shiva can and does channel through the drishti of other souls than Brahma Baba.
Maybe it is a bit confusing to call this messaging because 'message' suggests the conveying of particular words.

I agree - i am simply trying to make sense of the terms as used by the BKs. Personally I would call both Shiva speaking through Brahma Baba, and BapDada speaking through Gulzar's body "trance messaging", while the relating of Subtle Region experiences should be called something else entirely...

I don't know the origin of the BK use of the term "trance messenger" - but I did hear from an "old one" in Madhuban that in Sakar Brahma days, he used to regularly ask the "trance messengers" to visit the Subtle Regions and come back and tell him how his perfect form looked in comparison to his physical form - apparently he used this as an indication of how close to karmateet he had become.

It is interesting, and encouraging, that Brahma Baba seemed unable to go to the Subtle Regions himself at will - but required those with specialist psychic / trance abilities to do this for him. This implies (and some Murlis also indicate) that the ability to visit the Subtle Regions in trance (ie to be a trance messenger, in BK terminology) does not imply spiritual 'superiority" over those who cannot do it - it is merely a different "speciality" or service role.
Or maybe trance messaging involves speaking about the experience afterwards, whereas some people may go to the Subtle Regions in their meditation but not necessarily speak about their experience or call it trance messaging.

Absolutely. I see the term "trance messenger", as used by the BKs, as an official role that is accepted within the BK systems. But a great many BKs will have visited the Subtle Regions and will certainly not be called trance messengers. I have been lucky enough to have had this experience myself - but cannot do it at will - but I bet there are those who can go to the Subtle Regions at will, but who are not recognised by the BKs as trance messengers.

The whole thing is so unverifiable that it has been stamped on within the BK power hierarchy to avoid abuse - people were pretending to have visited the Subtle Regions and were inventing bogus messages. This is a standard problem in the realm of psychic abilities, channelling, etc. The charlatans tend to outnumber the genuine cases, and it is very difficult for anyone to accurately distinguish between the genuine and the bogus.

As i see it the BK organisational structure and systems have now become so rigidly set in stone that no new "trance messenger" will ever be accepted as genuine. What will they do when Gulzar dies? BapDada may simply move to Mohini or Shashi, if they are still around ... I suspect they are assuming that the need for a "Chariot" will be finished by then....
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Post01 Jul 2006

john wrote:What do you mean by this and who do you mean by BapDada?

Actually I should have written 'Father Shiv' instead of 'BapDada', because BapDada includes the soul of Ram and Krishna also who do not possess the power of causing divine visions/trance. This key is available only with incorporeal Father Shiv. It is He who causes the divine visions or the trance experiences. But it can also be said that it is the special role of some souls in this drama to experience divine visions/trance.

But I feel there are two kinds of divine visions. One which is caused due to the special efforts made by a particular soul as in case of devotees like Mira, RamKrishna Paramhansa etc. in the path of worship. The second one is not due to the efforts made by the individual soul, but is caused to it as per its role in drama or due to the blessing of Father Shiv, like the divine visions caused to the BKs at the beginning of the Yagya and the trance experiences of the BK trance messengers.

Anyways, I would seek further clarification in this regard from Baba and let you know.
With regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

john

reforming BK

  • Posts: 1563
  • Joined: 03 May 2006
  • Location: UK

Post01 Jul 2006

arjun wrote:Actually I should have written 'Father Shiv' instead of 'BapDada',

OK thanks for clearing that up, you nearly added a whole new dimension to Gyan :shock: :D
User avatar

uddhava

ex-BK

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post03 Jul 2006

howiemac wrote:It does seem that in channelling in general there are two recognised forms of channelling - conscious channelling (eg Brahma Baba) and trance channelling (eg Edgar Cayce, Gulzar). Conscious channelling is far more common and is not considered "clean" channelling, as the conscious medium can edit the messages at will ...

Dear howiemac,

Of the two types of channelling that you mention, it seems that trance channelling is more efficient than conscious channelling. It is surprising then that God would choose the less efficient method, which as you say causes 'confusion' about where The Knowledge is coming from.
Brahma Baba has to put Shiva's ideas into words, as Shiva is way beyond words and language, never taking any physical body - the closest s/he gets is through Brahma Baba acting as mouthpiece.

You say 'mouthpiece', but then you also say that Shiva is 'beyond words and language' - so the words come from Brahma Baba and the difficult question is in what sense are these words connected / related to Shiva? If not spoken by Shiva, is it then some vague kind of inspiration?

BTW I think there are two aspects to religious knowledge - one is the ineffable, unspeakable - the Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao kind of thing. So all religions are pointing to this, but then all religions also attempt to explain this ineffableness (why is it there) by claiming to know the metaphysical constitution of life (an example of this is the world being 5000 years old). So as soon as the unspoken comes 'down' to the level of spoken language, there are problems. Most religions are based on some kind of communication from God to man but on closer examination, these methods of communcation tend to suffer from serious flaws.
User avatar

howiemac

ex-BK

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2006
  • Location: Scotland

Post04 Jul 2006

Uddhava wrote:Of the two types of channelling that you mention, it seems that trance channelling is more efficient than conscious channelling. It is surprising then that God would choose the less efficient method, which as you say causes 'confusion' about where The Knowledge is coming from.

God has no option. God has no language, and no understanding of the details of physical (ie incarnated) life on earth. A mouthpiece is required - Shiva needs Brahma's conscious (and worldy wise) mind to use as an instrument to speak through.

You say 'mouthpiece', but then you also say that Shiva is 'beyond words and language' - so the words come from Brahma Baba and the difficult question is in what sense are these words connected / related to Shiva? If not spoken by Shiva, is it then some vague kind of inspiration?

I say yes - some vague kind of inspiration - vague in that the the influence of the Shiva souls is mixed with the influence of the Brahma soul, and in the ideas spoken, the distinction between the two is very hazy.

BTW I think there are two aspects to religious knowledge - one is the ineffable, unspeakable - the Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao kind of thing. So all religions are pointing to this, but then all religions also attempt to explain this ineffableness (why is it there) by claiming to know the metaphysical constitution of life (an example of this is the world being 5000 years old). So as soon as the unspoken comes 'down' to the level of spoken language, there are problems. Most religions are based on some kind of communication from God to man but on closer examination, these methods of communcation tend to suffer from serious flaws.
I agree with this fully. Well put :)
PreviousNext

Return to Commonroom