abrahma Kumar wrote:Your first post is one that I find quite interesting. Given that your profile introduces your current status as one in which you are "questioning your BK beliefs", it appears as if your zeal and enthusiasm are sky high because you seem to have jumped in at the deep end with wiki page editing and all. Good luck.
In fact, it was the other way around. I am currently in the process of challenging my beliefs. And not just my beliefs but also whether the contact with the BKWSU and the (immense) influence it had on me has really benefited me. I tend to think that it did the opposite.
Just a few weeks ago I started looking for information about the BKWSU, outside of the BKWSU. For this I used the WWW. I also found a book with citical information about the BKWSU.
In this process, I came across the English language Wiki page. Only there I found the address of this forum. So I got involved with editing the article prior to ever visiting this board. Had I known of this place, or in fact any other support forum for people in the process of questioning their affiliation with the BKs, I would probably have gone there first.
While with the BKWSU I sensed - in retrospect - that the teachers tend to present a very friendly picture of the belief system and leave out the more darker aspects. Those would be introduced only by time when one had already accepted very much and one's way of thinking had already been changed. This impression was reinforced when I read independent texts that revealed some things that I did not know because I did never get invloved with the BKWSU that far.
I saw this tendency repeated in the Wikipedia article. So I wanted to add something to the article that would make it more balanced.
I think for Christian readers it is an important information that Christian beliefs and "knowledge" of god are seen as less inspired by the BKWSU, and why. I don't think that this is a bad thing per se. Each and every religion sees itself as most inspired, I would think. Otherwise people would probably choose to convert to a more inspired religion. My emphasis was more on the side of why.
But there was also another reason:
I was also told when I first came to the BKWSU that anybody practicing Raja Yoga would be able to still be a Christian, a Hindu or Buddhist or whatever faith she came from. Later I discovered that this was not really true. I did not mind much as I was looking for a religion I could believe in anyway. And now I have read that this did not only happen in my particular centre but seems common practice. In retrospect, I think that I should have been more alarmed by such inconsistencies in what I was told there.
I put myself in the position of a Christian person that came to a BKWSU basic course and wanted to know more about this organisation that she (or he) has come in contact with. I think it would be important for her to know that she has been told something at least not entirely true. And the Wikipedia is the number one online information source for many people.
ardha, care to tell us anything more about yourself as relates to your experiences with the BKWSU?
Yes, I plan to write an introductory post. I just wanted to post what was on my soul first. But I will do it in its own thread, not here. Just quick answers to your questions:
How long have you been a student?
I went to the basic course about three years ago. I have not been a regular student all the time since then, though.
Have you been to Madhuban?
No.
Have you ever had the chance to visit any BKWSU bookstore?
No. Just the books section in the centers that I visited.
ardhanarisvara, what prompts you to share your Wiki experiences here? Is it on the hunch that wiki persona "Green108" is the same as http://www.BrahmaKumaris.info forum member "Mr. Green"? If so, maybe you can send him a private message (pm).
In this forum, I found many people who know about the BKWSU from an inside perspective but are also critical of it. I thought that here I could perhaps find people that had the same interest as me in editing the Wikipedia article and thus helping people to get a better balanced picture of the BKWSU and its belief system. That this thread already existed seemed to prove that. I sought the company of like minded people.
I also thought that maybe there are people here that are more invlolved in this Wikipedia "edit war" and could tell me about their thoughts about the motives of the people editing the article on the Wikipedia.
Also interesting to observe your feedback that some actions may be "counterproductive to revealing the truth about the BKWSU"; and then you go on to imply that your edits were based on "what I (you) learned in the center from the BKs!" and further that, "I (you) just don't have any physical evidence of that". Ardha, given all this uncertainty one would be brave indeed to 'publish' their "unsupported" thoughts on the www.
Yes, maybe it was a mistake to publish in the Wikipedia in such a disputed article. I don't see a problem with posting it elasewhere on the www though, because then it is just from my personal experience point of view and not with the demands of an encyclopedia entry.
Did you have any intention to add a disclaimer to your edits on the wiki page?
No.
Also, your access relevant resource material seems a bit on the "thin" side,
Yes. That is exaclty why I came here. To look for people who might help with that. But I also wonder whether perhaps some points are deliberately left out of the printed material distributed by the BKWSU and only told orally, because they could be cited and that would perhaps shed a bad light on the BKWSU in the eyes of some people?
so one wonders what will be the basis on which you will "set the article right"?
I did not want to set the whole article right. I just wanted to add what I know and help make it less POV. (POV = Point Of View, something forbidden by Wikipedia rules.) Oftentimes the latter is achieved by simple changing an "is" into an "is believed to be". I also realised that I couldn't "set the article right" on my own. That is why I posted here. To get support.
Actually, I am a student with the BKWSU but - for the sheer hell of it - I have to confess I have NO evidence back up any of any of your claims. Maybe one of the other forum members can assist. Any specific info you need?
I'd like to know in this context; what exatly is wrong about my addition to the article from a BK point of view? (Including the correction I made below).
Maybe the BKWSU Thinking Positively course will help you to overcome the affliction of a mind that is not in too good shape?
No thank you. I've already had that one. And I think it, and much of what I learned at the BKWSU and believed and practised, has probably hurt my shape of mind rather than making it better.
Is it this mind inconvenience which leads you to share with us that, "Frankly, I am (you are) not willing to read the lakhs of lines of discussion before ever contributing anything to the (wiki) article."?
Sorry, I don't understand that question. Probably my English is not good enough. What is meant by "mind inconvenience"?
If so, maybe a little time selective reading of forum content may answer some of your questions. You may even be able to avoid reading "lakhs of lines"?
I figured as much. Nevertheless, I wanted to share my experience with the Wikipedia article here, since this is the thread about this very article the process of its edition. And maybe someone here could have explained to me what was going on in this "edit war", who the involved parties are, where the frontlines lie, what has been deleted by whom and why it could not be put back into the article.
Is there anything wrong with that from your perspective?
Hope you get well soon ardhanarisvara.
Get well? Do you think I am ill?
Good luck.
Thank you.
P.S. ardhanarisvara, was it your comments on the wiki page as follows: Therefore Christian Gyan (spiritual knowledge) is seen as being impure while Brahma Kumaris Gyan is seen as the pure truth.? If so, you may also find discussed elsewhere on this site the tendency that the BKs have of arrogantly looking at the world from a viewpoint of their own "oblox". As far as I know there is no such thing as "Christian Gyan". Same tendency cropped up when a BK was discussing a biblical figure reaching the "angelic stage".
You are right. The (in my eyes) correct sentence would have been; "Therefore Christian beliefs about the nature of God, the soul and the world is seen as being impure, while Brahma Kumaris spiritual knowledge (Gyan) about these points is seen as the pure truth."
Could you live with that?
I find it rude of that person Green108 to just delete the whole addition. It would have been nice if he or she would have just explained to me what s/he found to be wrong about it. I would like to use this forum as a place where one could collaboratively find a version of this addition that is correct and backed up with references, if there is in fact any truth to it, which I believe.
Kind regards,
Ardhana.