Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

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

Oliver

  • Posts: 58
  • Joined: 21 May 2013

Re: Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

Post04 Jul 2013

I have read with keen interest, and I have to add my contribution towards this. Moreclearnow asks us to consider the harm posting personal information does to the individuals.

I have read with interest what you have written, and thank you for your sentiments. The direction I was discussing is that I do know of, and have also experienced, that the leadership of the BKWSU have encouraged harming individuals when it is in the benefit of the BKWSU.

So does the leadership replicate that behaviour? Occasionally, you could say so.

The reason why I hide under anonymity is that the leadership and the BKWSU are very good at certain types of unethical behaviour and one does not wish to be faced with any negative harassment at all.

ex.brahma

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2012

Re: Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

Post04 Jul 2013

moreclearnow wrote:It just doesn't interest me to find out when the world started as past is not relevant for my present or future spiritual journey

We are not talking about mere history, we are talking about scientefic facts in historical order, which in summary lead to demolishing BK 5000 year cycle myth, which is the core of Brahma Kumaris' faith ...!!
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10413
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

Post05 Jul 2013

You're right, ex.Brahma, it not "history" ... it's evolution, it's science (physical laws of lights), it's contradictory anomalies (how to remove all the space equipment from the moon and sky), ancient Chinese and Egyptian history, dinosaurs, and all the rest.
moreclearnow wrote:It's not that I did not accept it - I did accept it but since it never mattered to me much, I did not question the significance of it ... I have had a look at the debate of 5000 years few times in the past but all of this is just too tedious and boring to me.

That really just means you have accept it all as part of the package with their god spirit.

BKism only makes sense in a model of imminent Destruction and then rewards in Golden Age. Why on earth would anyone put themselves through all that now if the Kalpa were to go on for another 16,000,000 years?

If all BKs were told that Destruction was definitely not going to happen in their lifetime, they might do thing like plan for their old age, get an pension plan etc. The poor might have children.

Perhaps you already have the former?

And, if I was the BKWSU, I would start doing the mathematics to work out what I was going to do when all the center-in-charges reach retirement age and ask how they were going to be looked after.

You're saying that your own personal view or "spiritual path" has now altered from orthodox BKism. I think you have to accept that our observations and criticisms are still widely apt and accurate. You may be in denial about Destruction but they are still pumping it in the minds of individuals, day in day out.

Really, rather than coming and trying to stopping us criticise the BKWSU, you ought be spending your time reforming them.

"Just focus on the experience" ... that's also a BKism ... "don't think, don't ask, don't question". The subjective, floaty, trance-like experience ... No, sorry, something does not feel right to me.

moreclearnow

BK supporter

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2013

Re: Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

Post05 Jul 2013

ex-l wrote: Just focus on the experience" ... that's also a BKism ... "don't think, don't ask, don't question". The subjective, floaty, trance-like experience ... No, sorry, something does not feel right to me.

What other experience did you expect from BKism when you were in? I maintain that this experience is what keeps BKs glued. Take 5000 years out and it will have no effect. Take Destruction out and yet experience will not change though it will have some effect and some people will leave but if you take this subjective experience out then BKWSU will close down. This is why it's not that your criticisms are not valid, however, by overlooking and underestimating the power of this experience most of what you are challenging is theory not the practical experiences of people!

Can a spiritual experience be objective?

Here is the wiki definition of a spiritual experience/religious experience:
A religious experience (sometimes known as a spiritual experience, sacred experience, or mystical experience) is a subjective experience in which an individual reports contact with a transcendent reality, an encounter or union with the divine.

Such an experience often involves arriving at some knowledge or insight previously unavailable to the subject yet unaccountable or unforeseeable according to the usual conceptual or psychological framework within which the subject has been used to operating.Religious experience generally brings understanding, partial or complete, of issues of a fundamental character that may have been a cause (whether consciously acknowledged or not) of anguish or alienation to the subject for an extended period of time. This may be experienced as a form of healing, enlightenment or conversion

Core of spirituality is self-realization, transformation and connection with Divine which is the most important element of BKism in my view;
Carl Jung's work on himself and his patients convinced him that life has a spiritual purpose beyond material goals. Our main task, he believed, is to discover and fulfil our deep innate potential, much as the acorn contains the potential to become the oak, or the caterpillar to become the butterfly. Based on his study of Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Taoism, and other traditions, Jung perceived that this journey of transformation is at the mystical heart of all religions. It is a journey to meet the self and at the same time to meet the Divine. Unlike Sigmund Freud, Jung thought spiritual experience was essential to our well-being.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10413
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Criticisms of Brahma Kumaris Info

Post05 Jul 2013

Do you want a famous quote? "I hear that sometimes Satan comes as a man of peace." - Bob Dylan (see below).

Brahma Kumarism is Brahma Kumarism, not not Jungian spirituality or self-realization. And, as you will remember from the Murlis, Brahma Kumarism identifies itself as something unique and separate from all other "ignorant", "impure", "dark" and "unselfrealized" Bhakti religions.

Therefore to use them as a distraction or a defence is disingenuous.

Actually, I tend not to like the word 'disingenuous' and the way it is usually used in discussions to put down others, however, in this case I think it is fair. In recent years, during the period of your involvement, the Brahma Kumaris have increased their pillaging of other traditions and great thinkers exponentially ... famous quotes or invoking the wisdom of "ignorant shudras" ... largely, I would argue, as the philosophy of their own religious leaders is to limited and poor. Great traditions have been reduced to nothing but adverts for BKism which is hypocritical because of the attitudes shown towards them in the philosophy.

Why, or how can you fluff up the "stumbling in darkness" of Shudras and Bhakti to support and justify BK Gyan? Or was your god wrong about them and the 5,000 years too, and do you know better than him?

You cannot fool us. We know what the god spirit of the BK says and teaches about all those other religions.

One also has to see BKism as a whole ... it is an empire whose wealth has been built up on Destruction. "Destruction in 6 months", "Destruction in 2 to 3 years", Destruction in 1950, 1976, 1986 ... Destruction, Destruction, DESTRUCTION!

Were they to say today, "Fine, we've got enough money, properties and slaves now; let's just forget about Destruction. We were joking", it would not be a surprise, the leaders have very little integrity and change everything, but it could hardly be considered a noble or sincere way to amass such great power and wealth.

Elsewhere, you wrote that is such experiences could be created by science etc ... but on this forum we have one such small example, where hypnotist Darren Brown consciously gives an atheist a religious conversion.

Brahma Kumarism is not spirituality, it is spiritualism or spiritualistic and the subjective experiences you are talking about, bolster by all the hype surrounding them, it exactly what the Christian mystic Steiner, and others, would have called "Luciferic".

If there is a god in Brahma Kumarism, and there is no great guarantee of that, I would say it would Luciferic in nature (but you would have to understand what that meant first). Here is an oversimplified introduction ...
Someones including Rudolf Steiner wrote:Lucifer and Ahriman were two great angels (spirit beings) ... Lucifer and Ahriman together tend to comprise what most people think of when they think of 'the devil' but Steiner saw them as two distinct beings.

Lucifer entices humans into evil, or into sin, with light. He lures and seduces people with charm ... a lust for gold ... The gist of Luciferic temptation is that humans are initially attracted to Luciferic energy by something that appears, at first glance, as positive. Then, once ensnared, the person realizes they have been ensnared by evil ... he slips into us without us being aware of his presence.

Luciferic one-sidedness ... would have been human beings refusing to have any interest in other human beings, so content in their own self-absorbed narcissism they would have conceived of a profound distaste for the earth and everything connected to it. To the extent they would be glad to fly off into the lofty heights of the luciferically conceived "heavenly paradise", to live there forever satiating their passions and desires, where, of course, Lucifer would be more than happy to be their congenial host.

In short, the BKs' Shiva Baba and Paramdham.

The Brahma Kumaris don't study other religions, except to pillage them for advertising soundbites, and stray well away from subjects relating to spiritualism, possession, channeling and other realms ... because they don't want their adherents to start to think and question their addictive experiences.
Lucifer is the chief adversary of God. He tempts humanity ... potentially to its destruction.

Just because you can feel something does not make it good. In Steinerian terms, Lekhraj Kirpalani and the other BK mediums were possessed by Luciferic influences which continue to permeate and enlighten/overshadow BK adherents and work through them.

Previous

Return to Commonroom