Brahma Kumaris Info - the Truth about BK Meditation

From Monism to Dualism and God Shiva

For the first 20 years, the Brahma Kumaris were a monist tradition in the form of orthodox Advaita schools believing that there was only one ultimate substance or principle called the Brahm or Braham. They practised faith in "Aham Brahm Asmi", literally "I am Brahman" or "I am God".

At some point after 1950, the Brahma Kumaris introduced an individual personality they called the "Supreme Soul", WITHIN that Brahm element or "Soul World", into their theodicy calling him "Shiva Baba".

This should be 'theology'.

I think also helpful in 'BK for Dummies' would be a basic chronology (don't know if this is already on the site somewhere) showing (approximate) dates for maybe the ten most significant events in BK history, e.g. birth of Lekhraj Kirpalani, first visions, first Murli, first Murli that survives today, death of Lekhraj Kirpalani, arrival of BK in the West, emergence of PBK etc.

A timeline sounds good. I attempted to start one on the real Wikipedia but it was crushed and deleted by the BKWSU IT team!

uddhava wrote:This should be 'theology'.

I am not 100% sure of which but I suspect it could be either? I take your point but bearing in mind the important of The Knowledge™ ... I chose it because;

Theodicy came to be synonymous with 'natural theology', that is, the department of metaphysics which presents the positive proofs for the existence and attributes of God and solves the opposing difficulties.

Theodicy, therefore, may be defined as an attempt to explain the nature of God through the exercise of reason alone.

This is in juxtaposition to theology, which attempts to explain the nature of God using supernatural revelation and faith.

ex-l wrote:I am not 100% sure of which but I suspect it could be either? I take your point but bearing in mind the important of The Knowledge™ ... I chose it because;

Theodicy came to be synonymous with 'natural theology', that is, the department of metaphysics which presents the positive proofs for the existence and attributes of God and solves the opposing difficulties. Theodicy, therefore, may be defined as an attempt to explain the nature of God through the exercise of reason alone. This is in juxtaposition to theology, which attempts to explain the nature of God using supernatural revelation and faith.

'Theodicy' is more generally known in the narrower sense of a religious justification for evil and suffering (e.g. why is there cancer?). The second definition which you are using is I think little used and quite technical, i.e. not really suitable for BKWSU 'beginners'. More importantly, even if you wanted to use 'theodicy' in this technical sense, it is still wrong in your sentence.

Perhaps you are trying to indicate that although according to BK, The Knowledge is revealed by God, you don't believe this is true. If so, this is not necessary - the term 'theology' is now widely used to mean 'belief system about God' so 'Islamic theology' is what Muslims believe about God, and 'BK theology' is what BK's believe about God. In this sense, 'theology' does not concern itself with whether such beliefs are true. But even if you wanted to make the point that you don't believe BK beliefs to be true, using 'theodicy' is still not correct. Theodicy in this wider sense of 'natural theology' means using reason to argue for the existence and nature of God (e.g. the argument from design etc) i.e. choosing not to rely on 'revealed' knowledge. If the person uses knowledge which he claims (rightly or wrongly) to be revealed by God, it is not theodicy.

The truth is, I am still not sure if I was wrong and think that both words could fit but I do think that this kind of educative discussion is what this forum ought to have been about and so I am grateful for it.

I used the word theodicy lightly as it had been used in Dr John Walliss's book on the Brahma Kumaris, "The Brahma Kumaris as a Reflexive Tradition". Probably the best book on the BKs to date, or at least the most inclusive and the one to get the most close to the subject. I thought about it as relating to Lekhraj Kirpalani and the BKs' attempts to resolve the nature of a Unlimited God, by having a personal manifestation of Him, and their rationalisation for His limits and the causes of evil, body-consciousness and "The Drama" (pre-determination).

Being challenged, I was forced to have to go and learn more about the word and its roots, which is good.

Definition of Theodicy
Catholic Encyclopedia > Theodicy

ex-l wrote:I used the word theodicy lightly as it had been used in Dr John Walliss's book on the Brahma Kumaris, "The Brahma Kumaris as a Reflexive Tradition".

I am not saying of course that 'theodicy' cannot be used re BK, I am only talking about your particular sentence. Can you please quote the sentences which you have in mind where John Walliss uses 'theodicy', so we can see how he uses it?

uddhava wrote: Can you please quote the sentences which you have in mind where John Walliss uses 'theodicy', so we can see how he uses it?

On second thoughts, don't bother. I have checked myself and I can see that he clearly loves the word 'theodicy', and uses it very broadly and in ways outside your own two definitions in your previous post. I will come back to this. In the meantime, I wonder if he has seen this website. He is on Facebook if you want to say hello.

I only had one at hand, page 116 of his book;

John Walliss wrote:"a world affirming cultic milieu, such as the ongoing globalisation, New Age-ication and instrumentalisation of the original, world-rejecting theodicy".