Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

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

arvind.giri

BK

  • Posts: 77
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013

Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post16 Feb 2014

I observed that discussions on this forum are in general logical and based on the facts and evidences.

But sometimes it also happened that ex-BKs tend to use this forum very freely and exaggerate the claims.
Is it fair to exaggerate the claims without substantiating the same.

Below are some of the instances:
"All BKs masturbate, many have sex."
Really? How do you exactly know? :)

"All Brahmakumari sevikas are lesbians"

And there can be many more. I did not get a chance to go through each and every thread.

Well, nobody is stopping anyone from posting anything, but then don't pretend that ex-BKs are ethical and all the information present here is credible. Specially when your counterparts are supposed to substantiate each and every statement.

"*I know some people will try to draw a bigger line to make the original line look smaller. But then ask yourself that when you talk about being ethical and credible, is that in relative sense?"
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post16 Feb 2014

You're basing the foundation of your argument on a falsehood here, falsely created a collective identity and responsibility, and falsely targeting us as responsible for it. "Ex-BKs" do not have any collective identity, organization or structure. Once the individual leaves the BKWSU, they are on their own. They are not an "Army" with a high command like the BKs

I am going to split off the discussion about BKs and masturbation to a separate topic, although we have discussed it before.

But, if we are discussing ethics and credibility here, I have to point out that no ex-BK here said, "All BKs sevikas are lesbians". It was a report from a local journalist in the middle of India. And from that report, I do not know if it referred to *all* Brahma Kumaris or just all Brahma Kumaris *at the center* in question.

The article was regarding a women who claimed to have been sexual, or sexually and emotionally abused. We can assume she is in pain and turmoil. I do not think she was intent on making a categorically factual statement. I think she was speaking out of the pain and turmoil of the women she had encountered, and that there may have been some truth to it.

I am concerned you are not concerned about the abuse of such women, and the abusive, exploitive nature of ... I am guess lower caste, lowly educated women who are isolated within the BKWSU.

Ditto, when mr green wrote 'in discussion' ... and then later clarified ... his statement, "All BK masturbate", he was not really saying, "all BK masturbate", he was saying to another individual who was in pain and confusion, "Do not worry about it, everyone does it" attempting to give them some comfort and alleviate their troubles.

You don't point out that he immediately clarified his statement, again painting a false impression.

Please remember, this part of our website is 'discussion'. We get to facts via discussion. We start with a rough idea and collate information to give us an overview, and then refine from there to get to the truth. You would not expect every statement made in a tea shop, even by experts, to be 100% objective ... (unless it really matter) ... in conversation, we use figures of speech and sometimes you have to look beyond the words to the intentions.

I don't think your intention is to seek out the truth ... but that you are yet another new BK come along to cast false aspersions and discredit us.

Casting false aspersions and discredit others is impure and not divine behaviour. Give it up and help us seek the greater truth in these matters. On past experience of BKs, I don't think you will though.

I might ask you, "please go to the Seniors and check up what the truth of the sex abuse allegations are, or what proportion of Brahma Kumars masturbate?". You won't, and they won't tell you it either, and you'll accept that, and they'll just try and bury the truth of what happens in their religion; cover it up, forget it about it and paint a false image; and we'll question whether that is ethical, how the BKWSU could be more ethical ... a word that does not exist in their lexicon ... and suggest improvements.

And the BK leadership will carry on ignoring us as long as the money keeps rolling in.
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1885
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post17 Feb 2014

arvind.giri wrote:it also happened that ex-BKs tend to use this forum very freely and exaggerate the claims

I prefer the term ”some people”. People exaggerate as a rhetorical technique or to grab attention, like a headline.

I agree that to say ”all BK women are lesbians” is like saying, "everything that emerges in Murli is false”. Of course, not everything in Murli is false, but truths are used to sell falsehoods, whether they are believed sincerely or otherwise.

So "Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question” as a heading - the partisan heading grabs attention more.
But it should read "Ethicality and credibility of some people in question” - and the thread then explores ethics and credibility of any claim from any side, as this is a BK-themed forum, issues to do with BK.

arvind.giri

BK

  • Posts: 77
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013

Re: Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post17 Feb 2014

I prefer the term ”some people”.

My sincere apologies. Agree with you to change the term to "some people".

I'd like to rewrite the post as below ( Also used this opportunity to correct some grammatical mistakes :| )
Title: Ethics and credibility of some people in question

Body:

I observed that discussions on this forum are in general logical and based on the facts and evidences.

But sometimes it also happened that some people used this forum very freely and exaggerated the claims.
Is it fair to exaggerate the claims without substantiating the same ?

Below are some of the instances:
    "All BKs masturbate, many have sex."
    Really? How do you exactly know? :)

    "All Brahmakumari sevikas are lesbians"
    And there can be many more. I did not get a chance to go through each and every thread.
Well, nobody is stopping anyone from posting anything, but then they shouldn't pretend that they are ethical and all the information presented by them is not exaggerated and is credible. Specially when you expect others to substantiate each and every statement.

"*I know some people will try to draw a bigger line to make the original line look smaller. But then they should ask themselves that when they talk about being ethical and credible, is that in relative sense?"

arvind.giri

BK

  • Posts: 77
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013

Re: Do all Brahma Kumars and Brahma Kumaris masturbate?

Post17 Feb 2014

Admin wrote:Moved from: "Do all Brahma Kumars and Brahma Kumaris masturbate?" as this response did not discuss masturbation.

I must accept that I did not read the second comment of Mr. Green
Mr. Green wrote:referring to all BKs masturbating
Maybe that is untrue.

Sorry Mr. Green.
so it would be unfair to use it to discredit all comment made by everyone ...

*everyone

Somebody is again exaggerating the facts.

As far as following claims, in general, go:
    1) All BKs masturbate, many have sex
    2) All Brahmakumari sevikas are lesbians
Both are objective type and have already been answered to be false. That is what I was trying to prove, that is why I raised these initially. It seems like purpose of these was not to help ex-BKs or exiting BKs, but to grab the attention.

Mr. Green, replied later, but are we all sure that the person who asked the question might not have got deceived by the exaggerated claim at the first place?

Another thing I would like to make very clear that I don't have any facts and since I don't have any facts so I can neither approve nor disprove anyone's facts.

If anyone is providing the facts and inferences, onus is on him to defend those facts and his conclusions.

Let me also remind you that:
    Point#1 : "Everyone (yes, everyone) in BK is a student and is on his/her journey".
    Point#2 : Are all BKs perfect? As it is implied from the the point#1. No
    Point#3 : Are all BKs committed to BKism teachings? No. Implied from the facts that we have ex-BKs today.
    Point#4 : Are people following BK out of their faith? Yes.
    Point#5 : Is everyone's understanding of the BKism same? No.
Now tell me, what exactly are you trying to prove?
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post17 Feb 2014

Look, what you are trying to do here is establish doubt and then, on the basis of establishing doubt, extend that doubt to cover all other areas, make our criticisms look weaker and the BKWSU better.

Why not just make your point and address the individuals in question (which is mostly me)?

One reason I reject your line of argument is that you are being sloppy or tricky, e.g.
    a) It was not an ex-BK who said, "All Brahmakumari sevikas are lesbians". It was a journalist working within the scope of their article and publication. We don't know what the victim of sex abuse said, what she meant, or to whom she was applying it (context). Reasonably, it may have only applied to the women at her centre ... and that may well be true.

    Look into, ask the BK leadership for comment, and tell us what facts you find. Add to the discussion.

    b) Ditto, I did not say, "everyone", I said "everyone who has freed themselves from the total sexual control of the Brahma Kumaris" ... which was the definition I was using for ex-BK within the context of a post on masturbation.
The victim of sex abuse in the newspaper article did not actually accuse them of being *sexually active*. The sevikas could have been living as 'celibate homosexuals'. The question of BKs living as 'celibate homosexuals' certainly crossed my mind when I was a BK, and it is something the BKs should consider.

I know for a fact homosexual BKs exist. Other here have reported homosexual activity in Brothers' bhavans and questioned some of the sensuous semi-naked massages going on in Sisters' rooms in Mount Abu.

(* I mean, which side of the room should a queer BK sit on? And if separation the sexes is to stop physical attractions, should male homosexual not be sleeping with the Sisters? Allows such statements to be made opens up the door to worthwhile discussions, e.g. what is the BKWSU conception of homosexuality and attitude towards it? I would argue that it see homosexuality as an impurity and corruption as I have never heard of "Narayan and Narayan", living together or ruling Heaven on Earth.)

No, such statements are not "objective". This is a discussion forum. We encourage open and almost uncensored discussions. We do not expect scientific accuracy where it is not possible and, as we are not claiming to be god or the supreme religion and taking millions of dollars off people, the moral responsibilities and expectations upon us are not so high. Yet despite that ... and despite being "the lowest of the low" and "impure, ignorant shudras" according to BKs ... our standards of accuracy are far, far higher than the BKWSUs.

We are revolutionising the BK movement the accuracy of our revelations.

Neither statements were "objective type" nor "have already been answered to be false". As shown, mr green immediately clarified his position and was just appeasing a distressed individual. As a native English speaker, I am usually able to recognise a figure of speech or intention when I read one. I'll also be the judge of what is best to help ex-BKs or exiting BKs, as I have more experience in the area, and goodwill towards it, than you. At present, you have an opposing intention.

Do I really need to explain to you?

We encourage people to express themselves and their frustrations/angers/upsets/disappointments/abuse; we encourage people to work out their thoughts and feelings; we allow people to explore rough ideas ... and then we refine them down to find out the greater truth in them.

For example, if someone joins this forum and says, "Dadi Janki is a lying piece of ****", it does not mean she is literally a piece of **** ... although it is true to say she has been deeply dishonest for decades and continues to be ... it means that person is expressing their frustrations and discharging. We allow that and look for the truth in it.

What are we trying to prove?

We are not trying to do anything. We've already achieved it. We've proven beyond doubt the falsifications the BKs have carried out in the past and what they are are still like in the present, and will continue to expose them all we can ...
    Hopefully, we'll save a few individuals or families from the damage, upheaval and being financially robbed by the Kirpalani Klan.

    Hopefully, we'll make a few ex-BKs and exiting BKs laugh and feel better about themselves and the world, and help them free themselves and move on in life.

    And, hopefully, we'll make a few pretension, dishonest, twisted, corrupt and plain nasty BKs uncomfortable enough to want to change for the better.
Apparently, we've already saved more than one life.

However, these are really my personal thoughts on the matter. Others might think and feel differently and so I do not speak for them.

arvind.giri

BK

  • Posts: 77
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013

Should we conclude anything from heinous crimes like rape

Post18 Feb 2014

Some people challenge BKs to comment on thread of incidents of rape or sexual abuses. I really don't know what to comment.

Everyone here understands that there is no other heinous crime as rape and sexual abuse. Still there are some people who try to take mileage out of it, for their personal interests. Can we call them human? And then they challenge others to talk on it. I haven't seen such a low morality. Is it ethical to do so? Specific to those people I'd like to say that they are worst than the one who did the heinous crime and in my opinion BKWSU deserves a serious apology from them.

They just keep spilling negativity without telling people what exactly they want to prove. It would be better if at the end of the post, they can write one or two liner that above facts prove this. So that we can discuss the conclusions in a healthy manner.

Following line seems just perfect to these kind of people: "First they will bring you down to their level then they will win by experience".

Are we sure that we are not getting influenced by these kind of people who want us to believe the facts as per their mentality?

* There are many threads related to these crimes, so I had to start a new thread to discuss these kind of things in general.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Ethicality and credibility of some ex-BKs in question

Post18 Feb 2014

Apology ... for what!?! Chances of them getting that is less than zero. They owe *us* all an apology for being dishonest to us, manipulating and exploiting us, and leaving people we knew open to abuse or suicidal without any support ... beyond wasting years of our lives on their mad goose chase. A goose chase you probably have not even started yet.

How long have you been a BK and how deeply are you involved?
arvind.giri wrote:Some people challenge BKs to comment on thread of incidents of rape or sexual abuses ... they are worse than the one who did the heinous crime and in my opinion BKWSU deserves a serious apology from them.

You are starting to become silly now.

Firstly, you are addressing ex-l, not other people. So address ex-l. You can do so here, or you can use the topic specifically criticising ex-l's posts.

You are saying that ex-l is "worse than a rapists or a child sex abuser".

Secondly, the quote you are referencing is Mark Twain's, and it is "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience". Therefore, I think you are also calling ex-l a stupid person. Hmmn ... I don't think even the BKWSU leaders, who are surely far more spiritually enlightened than you (?), would call ex-l that.
    Have you said everything you want to say on this forum?

    Have you read and understood anything we have researched?

    Do you have any concern for the victims at all? These are external, third party reports we are documenting now.
Arvind, we've asked you on more than one occasion, how long have you been involved with the BKWSU and at what level or depth. You have not answered us. It's very difficult to know how to answer unless you tell us.

What is the significance of reporting and discussing all these cases?

In the Murli the god spirit of the BKWSU used to say, "not a hair on your head will be harmed". He guaranteed that he would protect BKs, "like a mother cat cares for her kittens". Those are direct Murlis quotes (... which is why I ask how much of a BK you are and how often you study the BK scripture).

Why does the god spirit of the BKs tell his devotees that he will protect them and, "not a hair on your head will be harmed" ... and then these things happen?

And these things do happen. BKs have been sexually abused, children have been sexual abused, Sisters have been raped, murder, committed violence suicides, BK ripped off by other BKs, families split up etc ...

This is a classical problem in philosophy, it is not new. Indeed, Ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341–270 BC) expressed similarly as follows ...
Epicurus wrote:“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

Related to the god spirit of the Brahma Kumaris it's easier.
    If the god spirit of the Brahma Kumaris is the Ocean of Knowledge, why does get so many facts so wrong?
    If the god spirit of the Brahma Kumaris is the Ocean of Truth, why does he say things that are not true?
    If the the god spirit of the Brahma Kumaris is the Seer of the Three Aspects of time, why does he make wrong predictions?
    If the god spirit of the Brahma Kumaris makes promises, why does he not carry them out? And what do think of and you call someone who does not?
The simple answer is. He is none of the above, and his promises are worth nothing.

The moral and ethical responsibilities of someone who claims to be the Supreme God and the God of all religions are somewhat higher than the moral and ethical responsibilities of an impure, imperfect human being.

Perhaps we can discuss how many times higher? On a scale of 1 to a million, how much higher would you say they are?

For me, a god or even a truly religious person would be humble and consistent. They would either keep their word, or not give it. They would not state what they did not know and would never make predictions they could not guarantee. What they said would be accurate and checkable. These are just simple things even simple human beings could manage.

Why cannot the BK god spirit nor their so called "Father of Humanity"?

Return to Commonroom