Archbishop of Canterbury on meditation and real spirituality

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the senior bishop and principal leader of the Church of England, the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Christian Church, a central position in the British Establish and Empire, Commonwealth, English speaking world.

Recently, Rowan Williams the outspoken ex-Archbishop of Canterbury launched "a withering critique of popular ideas about spirituality". on on meditation and spirituality (he did not "exit" the church, he just retired and is well regarded). He said ...

...

"The last thing [spirituality] is about, is the placid hum of a well-conducted meditation."

...

And interesting comment from someone who knows a lot more about real religion ... and the business and politics of it ... than most of us and the BKs do.

He went on to say that the word "spiritual" in today's society was frequently misused and has come to mean, "unworldly and useless".

"The idea that being "spiritual" is just about having nice experiences is rather laughable.

Most people who have written seriously about the life of the spirit ... spend a lot of their time telling you how absolutely bloody awful it is."

"I'd like to think, at the very least, that spiritual care meant tending to every possible dimension of sense of the self and each other, that it was about filling out as fully as possible human experience."

He was speaking with the president of the Liberal Judaism movement, Rabbi Julia Neuberger, someone the Brahma Kumaris have chased during their social climbing campaign. Neuberger responded she found some uses of the word self-indulgent and offensive. Williams argued that true spirituality was not simply about fostering the inner life but was about the individual's interaction with others.

Williams was also scathing of Westerners claiming to be 'persecuted' for what is little more than exaggerated 'mild discomfort'.

"When you've had any contact with real persecuted minorities you learn to use the word very chastely. Persecution is not being made to feel mildly uncomfortable.

For goodness sake, grow up."

I imagine the stock Brahma Kumaris' response would be that the Archbishop is an ... "ignorant, deluded, body-conscious Shudra, and merely a Bhagat soul with a fraction of the number of lives they have ... who lacks self-realisation and never had a real relationship with God, like they do, and is not going to heaven anyway".

Of course, they would never say that publicly as it would be too damaging to their facade ... but that is precisely what their core teaching say of such individuals and other religious traditions.

Big names like Williams and Neuberger are seen as being great for social climbing and being using ... but their opinions are nothing more than "Maya" (delusion) and "manmat" (put down as their own worthless opinions). If their god Lekhraj Kirpalani did not say, nor their gurus like Dadi Janki Kirpalani, then it not worth considering.

The Brahma Kumari leadership, and inner circle courtiers, appear to spend much of time filtering out controversial ideas in order to protect their control and influence over their adherents. In my experience, questioning and real discussion are not encouraged and generally skilfully disarmed in any of 10,000 ways.

An edifying series of comments by Williams and Neuberger. Thank you for sharing.

I imagine the stock Brahma Kumaris' response would be that the Archbishop is an ... "ignorant, deluded, body-conscious Shudra, and merely a Bhagat soul with a fraction of the number of lives they have ... who lacks self-realisation and never had a real relationship with God, like they do, and is not going to heaven anyway".

Of course, they would never say that publicly

But, in the end, it is not what people say but what they do that matters (which is partly what Williams was on about).

The BKs might say a lot in agreement with such statements, but such is the cognitive dissonance that they think "sending Yoga vibrations" or the "placid hum of a well-conducted meditation" IS interacting so IS spirituality ...

Thank you. I was very encouraged by Williams's comment but I imagine the typical BK response, of "what do they know ... the deluded shudras ... only we know what is the highest upon high".

Put simply, 99.9% of the Brahma Kumari leader's attention to detail is behaving in a such a discrete manner and *not* reacting to such comments and criticisms so as to continue to glide through high society seeking out their best political and financial advantages.

And that, in my opinion, is why you see the Brahma Kumaris sucking up to politicians and corporate leaders and never on the side of workers or downtrodden.

This how the concept of "darna" or good conduct has been corrupted by the BK leaders, flipped almost 180 degrees. Dharma, which might actually require one to take a stand, has been turned into flaccid flattery, slippery smoozing and glazed eye ignoring.

Add to that the widespread use of hypnosis, to mentally put people comfortably to sleep and break down their resistances, and treats, like "free" invitations to fairly luxurious retreats centers for Westerners and VIPs and, bingo, BKism in the West.