Disassociating general meditation practice from BK method

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

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post10 Mar 2014

Since we were ape-like, and all through human history, most of us have lived in tribal extended families. A group size manipulated to remain at a workable size, e.g. when it became too big, it would be split.

Prohibiting nature expansion through procreation, but yet incurring perpetual and even growing financial demands, the BK tribal creed and system has evolved to be parasitical on other procreative tribes.

It is like those tribes in the past, all over the world from early Judaism to "Darkest Africa" that went on kidnapping and raping sprees to enlarge themselves. Indeed, even to this day there are jatis in India whose marriage rituals are memorials of this, females being kidnapped from other families and then married.

How different is this from what the Brahma Kumaris do? And, if one accepts the BK philosophy, are such ritual and happenings not a "memorial" of what happened in the last Confluence Age? (That is what the BK philosophy states).

In India, men, women and children are all kidnapped for marriage. "Stockholm Syndrome" takes this history and explains why history has designed us to quickly re-adopt to our kidnapping tribe as a survival strategy.*

The difference between "normal" families and partnerships, and those including where one member is being indoctrinated by the Brahma Kumaris into paying tax and offering free labor to them, is the fanatical, all demanding nature of Brahma Kumarism and the fact that it has both living god they can go and meet in India and a compressed value of time due to their End of the World/Destruction paradigm.

I could imagine that one non-religious partner might be very proud of their religious partner *if* they spend all their time doing genuinely charitable acts for others, or even actions which embetter society as a whole, e.g. in the arts or community ... but the BKs basically don't. Most of the time and money which is not spent on acquiring real estate is spent on self-advertising and recruiting new "slaves" and "tax payers" for the bottom of their pyramid structure.

The time, money and energy which the BK partner should be investing into their own family and tribe is leeched off into BKism ... and we have documented many cases of; mostly vulnerable women (read stupid) encourage to throw money at BK center-in-charges and spending all their time at the centre instead of at time.

Within BKism, you also have this exaggerate 'us' and 'them' mentality most other religions are relaxing; we are pure, the world is impure, we are Brahmins, they are shudras ... and the great fear of physical contact.

Of course, BKism "kidnaps" subtly (mentally) ... or as they would say, in a "royal" manner ... but the result is the end. The surviving partner is then left living with their partner who them become a BK zombie ... the 'walking dead' (literally in BKism, it is said to "die alive".

Funnily enough, this is one aspect that even the PBKs criticise the BKs over and say they are practising the religion wrongly according to the Murli teachings.

(* According to the theory of Stockholm Syndrome, those who re-adopted to the kidnapping tribe survived, those who fought and struggles against their kidnapping tribe were killed and, hence, did not pass their genes down. Therefore, the theory is our genes developed to be adoptive and non-critical towards our kidnappers).
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post10 Mar 2014

I'd like to know the gender balance between married male and married female BK adherents experiencing such problem.

It's blatantly obvious that it would be much easier for a women to project their "perfect male" or Father figure fantasies on Lekhraj Kirpalani, than a heterosexual male to do so. In my opinion, much of the development of Janki Kirpalani's Western BKWSU Empire is coloured by her early "fantasy lover from a far" fixation on her savour from a tragically traumatic marriage ... Lekhraj Kirpalani.

Although we don't know why Power Janki's BK friendly parents married her off in the first place ... nor the causes of her infant's death (which many have come to question) ... it would be easy to see how the undemanding fantasy world of the Om Mandli, provided for financially by "God Lekhraj Kirpalani", would have been so appealing to her. Lekhraj Kirpalani played on very power existing archetypes, presenting himself God Krishna who had, for many centuries, been an emotional and even erotic fixation for women in India. Women who were probably denied both emotional and sexual satisfaction.

BK life of today is much different from the party it was back then, especially now that everyone has to pay for it rather than be looked after in comfort if they ran away and joined it. However, the denial of sexual and emotional satisfaction, and the channeling of it onto Lekhraj Kirpalani is still part of their model, as you first post on this subject documented, i.e. the wife of another man, carrying out mentally infidelity using pictures of an idealised Lekhraj Kirpalani.

Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post14 Mar 2014

…the denial of sexual and emotional satisfaction, and the channeling of these onto Lekhraj Kirpalani is still part of their model, as you first post on this subject documented, i.e. the wife of another man, carrying out mentally infidelity using pictures of an idealised Lekhraj Kirpalani

Infidelity (literally ”unfaithful”) depends on what ”faith” is being betrayed. In this sense, "faith" is not so much ”belief” as ”trust”, and then this "trust” merges with ”agreement”. That is, any relationship, especially a marriage, is by agreement. Some may involve an agreement to be ”monogamous”, others may be ”open” or allow each partner to have other relationships. In an open marriage, ”infidelity" is not an appropriate term. They each know about the other and allow it, usually on condition that they, the marriage, family etc always comes first.

(OK, for simplicity of language, let’s keep it as the wife being a BK or guru devotee). The relationship (and meditations, affirmations, promises - like rakhi etc) demanded by a ”Baba” is like the ”other man” demands the wife put him first and the husband & family second, to use the husband for practical purposes as bread winner and child minder etc, so that the wife and ”Baba" can get on with their relationship as unencumbered a possible.

That is, this invisible ”other man” demands the relationship of the couple be ”an open relationship” - dictates how any ”agreement" between spouses is going to be, regardless of what the couple themselves had agreed to. The husband becomes a ”cuckold” (an old word used as a term of humiliation for a man who’s wife prefers another lover - it’s derived from the cuckoo bird which lays its eggs in other birds’ nests who then do the work of raising the hatchlings).

I agree with your point ex-l about any ”Baba” being the idealised lover onto whom all fantasies and needs can be projected, and because of the nature of this "relationship”, any lack of fulfilment from that relationship comes from the ”imperfect” follower, whereas any lack in the relationship with the spouse or with the world is likely to be blamed on their lack of spirituality or vices or ”body consciousness” or other defect.

What the devotee in such cases doesn't grasp is the verifiable difference between the idealised lover and the real relationships in life. Who is giving to whom, and who is taking?

Who’s going to be there when the serious things happens - illness, bankruptcy, kids going through stuff, and who is only a "fair-weather friend” (one who shows up when there is something to share in, but disappears when there’s difficulties).

"Faith in God” may help a believer, any believer, to face difficulties. But so can faith in country or loyalty to a home or a ”cause" help a soldier find courage or a worker to work harder. It's an appeal to something bigger than one’s self, but in the end it’s the soldiers who fight well or the doctors’ skills that do the practical things that enable victory over a disease or an enemy. The idealised object is a beneficial ”trick” that enable one to fortify one’s morale to excel one’s normal self, or sometimes to stay humble.

The ideal lover is always out there somewhere but there is a meme going around on the internet that speaks to this. For all those who project their hearts onto an idealised lover, over & above their real friends and lovers ...

Image
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post14 Mar 2014

Pink Panther wrote:What the devotee in such cases doesn't grasp is the verifiable difference between the idealised lover and the real relationships in life. Who is giving to whom, and who is taking?

What I find interesting in all this ... and we have strayed from "Disassociating general meditation practice from BK method" is how closely the BKs have stuck to their original model (Om Mandli) ... and copied and enlarged as their archetype.

I am perfectly happy with the idea of consenting adults deciding how they want to relate, but at the same time feel that marriage vows or contracts are very important. If you make a vow, "to have and to hold ... until death do us part" then that is what it means ... I commit to you on the basis that you commit to me and in India, and especially the Sind of Lekhraj Kirpalani's time, it is and was even more complex involving family agreements, ongoing financial and property payments and so on.

Let's remember what happen ... Firstly, Lekhraj Kirpalani was their God and Krishna; there was no otherworldly god to disassociate with. Second, there was the "perfect couple" ... Lekhraj Kirpalani's tire old stupid wife was pushed into the background and Lekhraj Kirpalani got to play Laxshmi and Narayan with the younger, more beautiful, intelligent and unencumbered (capable to totally commit to him) Radhi Pokardas Rajwani. Remember, at one point they were even "spiritual" married ... his real wife completely out of the picture.

From memory, she even end up out of Abu in Calcutta.

Then, Lekhraj Kirpalani got into trouble. At first he broke his daughter's wedding contract to the community leader's family. He not only pulled her out of the contract, he even left her child with the other family. Then he encourage other young women to leave their husbands and join him ... remember again, there was no other god but Prajapati God Brahma ... "stealing" them like Krishna.

Lekhraj Kirpalani and his Radhe, and their relationship, were then idolised by the other girls from afar ... Janki Kirpalani being one.

We really know very little of their actual relationship and what discourses or intercourses they really had, except that from time to time they escaped the Mandli together.

Therefore ... I would argue ... the galavant acceptable of tossing aside worldly agreements, acting out infidelity, encouraging the breakdown on existing relationships, and idealising fantasy relationships is written into the core of Brahma Kumarism.

In short, they really don't give a **** about the mundane world and its laws and personal agreements, or other communities' values; and they are not only perfectly willing to take advantage of or encourage individuals to break them ... but have a habit of doing so.


Please correct me if I am wrong.

It's all done under the pretext of anything being justifiable because of the imminence of Destruction coming soon which has translates into a conscienceless pillaging of other couples and families wealth and family members ... and is why I describe them parasitical and vampire-like.

What the Brahma Kumaris should do is refuse individuals who are in committed relationships membership *until* they have fully concluded their responsibilities to their partner's satisfaction, e.g. brought up kids, paid off mortgage etc.

But the Brahma Kumari leaders never will do ... because there is money and property and even "blood" in doing so*.

* Extending the vampire analogy ... the vampire (BK) infect the victim (follower/wife) who then becomes a vampire (BK) who then "turns" other victims, e.g. marriage partners or children etc.

---

* Just as an aside, I find it interesting that two-word phrase "one’s self" is generally only justifiable when self is being used in a spiritual, philosophical, or psychological sense. In all other cases, one’s self can be replaced with the pronoun oneself. I often question myself which one I should be using and when.
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re:Disassociating general meditation practice from BK method

Post02 Jan 2016

Returning to topic:
A monk goes excitedly to his teacher, the head monk.

” I have been practicing zazen (seated meditation) for many months now master, as you've advised. I humbly report that the Lord Buddha has of late been blessing me with visions of himself, many times”

The master replied ”Keep up these meditation routines - at least until he goes away”.

Shamans, Tantrics, Dzog Chen practitioners, deity Yoga practitioners often use visualisations on real or imagined forms to alter their consciousness. Some of these practices involve externalising the form, eg imagining the deity as emerging from one’s heart and then merging with it in union. Not dissimilar to BK method of visualising oneself as a point of light then God as another poin tfo light, then imbuing both with emotional associations.

If they use a statue or photo, plastic egg with pinhole on the wall or a ”trans-light/trance light”, they practice internalising it, imagining it and they uniting. A shaman may meditate on his totem animal to become it. They become one. The experience of Dual and non-dual alternate between integrating and disintegrating.

In all these traditions, that is only a half-way point. For BKs it is the end point.

In Buddhist deity Yoga, not only does the deity manifest through the ”decision” of the meditator, and the identification take place at the ‘choice’ of the yogi, it must also ”dissolve” at his decision. The union and separation are determined by him/her.

There is no illusion that this was anything other than a 'thought-construct’, a mental formation, arising sankhara, used as a tool to see the transience of our notions of self; and understand practically that one is, that reality is in fact what one 'chooses'. In Buddhism they say karma is cettana (choices).

The shaman who through his practice becomes, say, a bird to enter his other universe to ”fly" (astral project) or to see with that altered perspective does so in order to return and to serve. If he cannot stop "being a bird” to exist or serve his society as a man ethically & practically in the objective world then he has, to all intents and purposes, gone mad. If a benign madness, he may be accepted as a fringe dweller. If that madness is dangerous, he may be exiled in some way. If he is charismatic he may, to some, become like a guru or saint.

In all its changes over the decades - from "Prajapati God Brahma" to 'Shiva speaking through Brahma' to ‘BapDada’ and the whole Krisna & Radhe, Lakshmi and Narayan narrative etc ... whatever Dada Lekhraj taught and BKs practice, he and the BKs never go past that halfway point nor see it as such. The ‘dream’ or the 'narrative construct' is the reality they want to dwell in.

There's no discernment that all such meditations are the constructs of ego and constructs for ego.

Such discernment is called "doubt” by BKs and other similar group-think beliefs - it raises a fear that one will permanently dissolve the ”Yoga”, to become permanently divorced from God or Guru or Christ* - another way in which psychological, cult or religious entrapment takes place.

Despite using similar jargon, Lekhraj couldn't see these mental formations, sankara, for what they were. He and BKs who practice his way, along with other similar devotional practices, are concerned with manifesting an alternative reality and ignoring the actual.

Those who play the whole game, both halves, embody what they play in order to see through the artifice of self-constructs (ahamkar). They take assumptions and imaginations to 'logical conclusions’ to see them for what they are, to get a better handle on reality. Done well, with *complete understanding and appropriateness, it's not meditation for transcending but a reality check and immersion in the present, becoming more present, not absent (*skt: samyak-smṛti /Pali: sammā-sati, translated as ”complete total memory", "right awareness or attention” - keeping alert to phenomena that affect body and mind).

Understanding ego - its place & purpose along with its limitations and 'dangers’ - is partially helped by playing with alternative ego-constructs such as the roles played in life or in meditations - but they are all constructs. To decide one of these constructs is real and that it needs reinforcement is how entrapment happens.

*Christian mystics like Tielhard De Chardin or Meister Eckhart describe practices much like the shaman and dzog chen practitioners.

Image
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post07 Jan 2016

What's the "full distance" for those paths?

I would have said the BK got half-way ... and then stopped off to go to the bank and bank all their wealth.
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post08 Jan 2016

Hi ex-l,

I suppose the full distance is, in few words, that all conceptions are just that, conceptions, and not 'the thing' itself.

All knowledge is provisional. All things are transient, therefore all things are not ‘things' but events.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post08 Jan 2016

That wouldn't sell as well to potential BKs, would it?

You talking of the "Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water" ilk?

Where's the solace in that for some woman married into a relationship she did not really want, or which has gone stale ever since the kids left home?

It's the magic, seduction and emotional comfort, the promise of visions and blessings that they seek, no? Experiences Rudolf Steiner would have described as "Luciferic".

Steiner uses the term in a specific manner and I am not suggesting or encouraging anyone invests much time in them, nor accepts them as anything but useful allegories, but some of the correlations between his visions and BKism are interesting. I was looking for some simple quotes or links to explain what I mean but could not easily find them (his traits are defined, here). Unfortunately, Steiner wrote voluminously and Germanically and so it's a little hard to find an Deepak Chopra size sound bite.

Steiner saw "Luciferic Influences" as real; one of a number of spiritual hierarchies, and coming from the East through human form. Interestingly, he placed the last incarnation of Lucifer on earth as being 3,000 years before Christ ... which, depending which point of view you take, could align with the Hindu belief of Krishna's last incarnation, which then aligns with Lekhraj Kirpalani and BKism.

From: Rudolf Steiner: Inner Impulses Of Evolution 2 Lucifer and Ahriman's Influence, The Threefold Christ at around 31 minutes ...
from the East ... the distrubing influence of Lucifer ... his influence to draw humankind again and again away from the earth, to draw humans right out of their physical body so that they shall perpetually fall into a state where he becomes no more than a a vision of themselves ... and is completely soul

I think nowadays, the BKs focus more on very general practises which we would not have recognised as BKism during our time, for its PR and marketing value.

But the problem is their underlying purpose and intention ... the leading on and seeding of ideas, the gradual seduction into the rest of it all which is surely false and a fantasy or illusion.
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post09 Jan 2016

Indeed not.

You can’t sell ”this is just another undisprovable concept like all the others” or "by defining your experiences according to our prescribed dogmas you will be no less trapped than by others' dogmas, but it's a better, more pleasant trap”. (The old saying in business is ”build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a pathway to your door”!)

As for Steiner et al, everyone needs a language to describe what they are conceiving. Steiner was a man of his time, if a bit ahead in some areas (agriculture, education, although he believed that left-handedness was something to be trained out of a child. ) but he was not that different when it came to rearranging theories of cosmology, religion etc. He was as hierarchically minded & judgemental as many of his day, e.g. he fell in with and rationalised in his own way the racial hierarchy theories of his 19C European culture

Rudolf Steiner: “On one side we find the black race, which is earthly at most. If it moves to the West, it becomes extinct. We also have the yellow race, which is in the middle between earth and the cosmos. If it moves to the East, it becomes brown, attaches itself too much to the cosmos, and becomes extinct. The white race is the future, the race that is spiritually creative.”


Often a ”guru” is well aware how the language used can mislead & limit the acolyte and will give lots of warnings about it in the teachings - encouraging them to go beyond what he teaches in words, for the students to discover for themselves.

But another ‘guru’ will insist on literalness of what they teach, insisting there is nothing further than his words, so copy, imitate, accept, and any limitation or inadequacy is from the inferior acolyte. They seek commitment & devotion from the acolyte to them, their ashram, their version.

Even traditions which fundamentally shun such behaviour will throw up individuals and sub-cultures which feed on this human weakness, laziness which wants to be ”led” or "carried".
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post09 Jan 2016

But, as with Swedenborg before him, were there actually realities to their mystical experiences? is not it a mystic experience that we/so many seek in pursuing BKism rather than an arid intellectual understanding of everything? is not it what individuals get sucked in by and then hold out for years waiting for another one?

I think that's what happened with Steiner ... who, of course, the BKs would dismiss as just being a "one or two birther" having his Golden Age and cult at the End of the Kali Yuga. He did not want to establish a religion but many of those who followed him wanted to fit his visions into something concrete and unchangeable, conform to them and make others conform to them.

However, the ideas of Ahrimanic forces or archetypes are not his but go right back to Zoroastrianism and the Mithraic religion which rivalled early Christianity in influence.

The BK leaders, in my opinion, insist on literalness of their religion on the basis of, "it worked for them, therefore it must work for you". No interpretation, no negotiation. They'll tolerate some "Brothers' Maya" or extrapolations, as long as the Brothers remain serviceable but the system pretty much refutes anything that did not come out of the mouth of Brahma.

(As an aside, it is claimed Steiner's teachings came from an ascended master that "stepped out of the ether" and spoke to him rather than deep inward contemplation. A similar story many others from many cultures and ages claim).
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post10 Jan 2016

ex-l wrote:But, as with Swedenborg before him, were there actually realities to their mystical experiences?

The word ‘mystical’ comes from a term that means ”ineffable” or that which is unable to be spoken about, beyond words. It is very likely that real and profound experiences were had. Attempts to articulate them or describe them will inevitably resort to the language known and culture of the person speaking.
is not it what individuals get sucked in by and then hold out for years waiting for another one?

I heard an addict, a famous barrister, describe addiction as a hope, a seeking, to recapture a 'magical time’ had, before actual addiction set in, in which the substance was a co-factor but is mistakenly attributed as the cause of the ‘magic’. He was sharing a view told to him by Barry Humphreys (the satirist and ex-alcoholic) who had picked him as an addict, pulled him aside and shared his experiences of his descent; how he'd sought to regain ‘magical’ times in his youth when wine, wit, youthful health and exuberance made him the life of the party and a charismatic personality. His attempts to recreate "past glories” succeeded less and less often and only saw him descend into severe melancholic alcoholism. The barrister said this gave him something to rationally hang on to as he overcame his addictions.
However, the ideas of Ahrimanic forces or archetypes are not his but go right back to Zoroastrianism and the Mithraic religion which rivalled early Christianity in influence.

That’s what I meant when I said, "he was not that different when it came to rearranging theories of cosmology, religion etc."
the system pretty much refutes anything that did not come out of the mouth of Brahma.

Although, interestingly, many devoted BKs are (consciously or not) into implying their God’s teachings are wrong, even saying so openly sometimes, by proclaiming their views as different to official teachings.

The Western BK world seems to be becoming open to an ”anything goes" theology, trying to morph into a New Age community church open to all, almost. A better marketing strategy indeed. As long as people keep coming, donating, partaking ...

One well-known long term BK goes around proclaiming Velikovsky’s theories as more accurate than Brahma’s, as if he’s campaignign to have them officially adopted!

Others pretend BKs are no longer into ‘status' or Destruction, saying that is no longer the official teaching.

Well, tell that to the one million BKs in India!!
(As an aside, it is claimed Steiner's teachings came from an ascended master that "stepped out of the ether" and spoke to him rather than deep inward contemplation. A similar story many others from many cultures and ages claim).

Steiner was around before modern psychology. He used the language, vocabulary and ideas that he knew. If he had the language later provided by Freud, Jung et al he may have used terms like ”the unconscious” or, ”parallel universes” etc. People make sense of new things, new ideas or new experiences by associating them to what they already know - this (new thing) is kind of like that (old thing).
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post10 Jan 2016

I must correct something I wrote previously. It appears Steiner indeed lived into the time of the development of psychology and would have been very aware of the pioneers who wrote in his language of German. But he must have been captivated by his own theories. Here is an interesting letter from Jung when asked his opinion of Steiner’s assertions.
29 November 1935

Dear Frau Patzelt,

I have read a few books by Rudolf Steiner and must confess that I have found nothing in them that is of the slightest use to me. You must understand that I am a researcher and not a prophet. What matters to me is what can be verified by experience. But I am not interested at all in what can be speculated about without any proof. All the ideas that Steiner advances in his books you can also read in the Indian sources.

Anything I cannot demonstrate in the realm of human experience I let alone and if someone should assert that he knows more about it I ask him to furnish me with the necessary proofs.

I have read a few books on anthroposophy and a fair number on theosophy. I have also got to know very many anthroposophists and theosophists and have always discovered, to my regret, that these people imagine all sorts of things and assert all sorts of things for which they are quite incapable of offering any proof.

I have no prejudices against the greatest marvels if someone gives me the necessary proofs, nor shall I hesitate to stand up for the truth If I know it can be proved. But I shall guard against adding to the number of those who use unproven assertions to erect a world system no stone of which rests on the surface of this earth.

As Steiner was not able to understand the Hittite inscriptions yet claims to have understood the language of Atlantis, which nobody knows existed, there is no reason to get excited about anything that Herr Steiner has said.

Yours very truly,
C.G. Jung
[Letters Volume 1, Page 203-204]
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Disassociating general meditation practice from BK metho

Post10 Jan 2016

That's a good Jungian quote for us against BKism, however, I have to disagree with him regarding, "All the ideas that Steiner advances in his books you can also read in the Indian sources". That's plainly not right. There's a lot rooted in the European tradition, Goethe and totally unique ... and Zoroaster was not Indian.
But I shall guard against adding to the number of those who use unproven assertions to erect a world system no stone of which rests on the surface of this earth.

80 years into a now 100 year Confluence Age, only 20 years to go to a nuclear powered perfect Golden Age ... and what extraordinary evidence have the BKs produced to support their extraordinary claims?

Linking to my comment on the basis of BKism being rooted in the unprovable and undisprovable, this would also apply to their Yoga/meditation practise based on "remembering" ... again which is unprovable and unquantifiable. Unlike, say, hatha Yoga ... who knows who is doing what how well?

So how are "general meditational practises", which I would say are part of the beginning but not the end of BKism, measured?
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Separating general meditation practice from BK method

Post11 Jan 2016

He wasn’t talking about everything Steiner. The letter was in response to a question asked about his thoughts on ”Lumeria” a supposed lost continent that many 19th century theosophists, anthroposophists etc speculated on, along with the legend of Atlantis. Much of the Lumeria theory was based on things in Hindu texts.

BKism being rooted in the unprovable and undisprovable, this would also apply to their Yoga/meditation practise based on "remembering" ... again which is unprovable and unquantifiable ...

So how are "general meditational practises", which I would say are part of the beginning but not the end of BKism, measured?

As per the Buddhist saying, ”There are countless meditations and countless fruits of countless meditations” - there are so many ”brands” of meditations and techniques these days. And, indeed, the idea that meditation is actually a distinct thing in itself rather than just a certain kind of mentation that all people do, knowingly or not, is a blurry area.

While ”meditations” can be grouped according to their kind of effect), those that achieve a similar effect as the BK method without needing the unprovable religious claims the BKs make, well, that is indeed the foundational theme of this thread.

Meditation practices are unquantifiable except in terms of EEG, ECG, biochemistry etc. They can tell us a lot or a little, depending on what you are looking to be told. The effects on a person can basically be ascertained by, a) their own feelings of mood, and b) others perceptions of that.

A third criterion - let’s call it c) - may be to see the ”price paid” and effects on other people by the meditator’s practices. That would include the add-ons associated with the meditation practice, in the BK case - the whole shebang discussed on this forum - effects on family, relationships, life paths, changes in philosphy and values and the effect of these, money trails, moral behavioural changes (as you point out, BK-justified lying!) and so much more.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9587
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Separating general meditation practice from BK method

Post11 Jan 2016

Pink Panther wrote:A third criterion ... may be to see the ”price paid” and effects on other people by the meditator’s practices.

Like I saw about Dadi Janki, "What's the point of being 'The Most Stable Mind in the World', if all it means is that you can be stable as you lie, mislead, manipulate other people and encourage them to carry out crimes?".

This is what makes me think the BKs self-hypnosis is part learning to have the best poker face in the world as a mask to the intention behind it.

I have not sufficient experience of other meditation practises to comment as I found when I tried, I too easily slipped back into the the experience I had as a BK. I could be sitting doing breathing or Ch'an with others, and really just be being as I was as a BK.

I still don't know what it was, or even whether I was having the same experience as every other BK, and unlike Scientology with their E-meters, the BKs could not tell me either. They really have not a clue beyond controling and using the language to describe it. As long as you say the right words, they will ignore you ... until you flip out or fall to pieces ... and then just say, "do more Yoga".
Previous

Return to Commonroom

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests