BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

for discussing revisions in the history of the Brahma Kumaris and updating information about the organisation
  • Message
  • Author
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9342
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post19 Mar 2017

Consequent to pressures arising from this website and the PBKs, the BKs are having to reinvent their history yet again. What version are we up to now? I have lost count ... version 4.0?

According to the "official BKWSU history" the BK conmen made Lekhraj Kirpalani's very own daughter lie to say that in 1936 she walked into a room where her Father was bathed in a golden red light and voice from within him said, "Shivoham ... Shivoham ..." (which is, of course, a very common place mantra within Hinduism but which they translate as "I am Shiva ... I am Shiva ...") and claimed it to be evidence that God Shiva had come to earth and had announced his presence in 60 year old Lekhraj Kirpalani's home in Hyderabad.

Until very recently, and still widely across the cult's websites and printed media, the official BKWSU history claims that Shiva announced his present in 1936 to start the religion off.

Except that it never happened. "God's Chosen Ones", the "Highest on High", most spiritual on Earth Brahma Kumaris have been lying about it to the world for decades.

Original documents we found and published prove that there was *NO* mention of God Shiva in the cult's history until sometime after 1955. Up until 1955, they believe in God Brahma (Lekhraj Kirpalani). And, indeed, that the cult started around 1932 and Lekhraj Kirpalani was no where near 60. In order to make the falsehoods fit, they even had to change his date of birth and have fought to sustain those falsehoods against people, like ourself, trying to tell the truth to the world.

Now, in 'Asian American Religious Cultures' [2 volumes], edited by Jonathan H. X. Lee, Fumitaka Matsuoka, Edmond Yee, Ronald Y. Nakasone" BK Chandrika Desai, a vice president of the BKWSO and founder/director of the BKs' West coast Anubhuti Retreat centre writes a new, improved, updated version of the cult history in which it is now claimed that 1948 was the date for the Shivoham-Shivoham event.

Really?

What evidence does she present for that and why then was there still no mention of God Shiva in the cult when it started its first overseas ventures (sending representatives to a tiny, unimportant interfaith meeting in Japan)?

BK Chandrika still gets Lekhraj Kirpalani's date of birth wrong ... she claims 1876, not the 1884 it actually was.

She continues the corporate whitewashing of events, like the destruction of early documents was to "prevent the dissemination of misunderstanding".

Clearly borrowing from our findings and not crediting us, she brings forward the channelled spirit entity the early Om Mandli called "Piyu*", arguing that it was one and the same as the Shiva soul claiming "Piyu is synonymous with Incorporeal Shiva Baba" (which will confuse real experts in Hinduism), and record the title Lekhraj Kirpalani took for himself as "Prajapati God Brahma" but again interprets it in an idiosyncratic way, saying it meant Lord of the World (again, not how Hinduism conceives it).

She claims there was a revelation of Shiva "as a distinct incorporeal god" in 1952 and that trance "clearly revealed Shiva Baba and Brahma Baba to be distinct".

Why then was there still no mention of the latter?

She continues the fudge between BK practice and Raja Yoga (an entirely separate tradition they stole the name from) ... and even goes on to lie about how BK service in the USA started, writing out of the history BK Simon Vivian (who left long ago) and BK Hansa Raval (who secretly married and had a relationship with him) of Texas "two celibate teachers with 41 years experience", the BKWSO claimed in 1985.

A deception which continues on the BK Texas website (complete with faked up picture of Dadis Prakashmani and Janki in cowboy hats!)

"Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" ...

To the BK mindset, none of this matters. Fake is fine if it sounds good and sells. Details do not matter. What matters is "the experience" (and that the money keeps rolling in).

But the question still remains, could such a mess truly be "of God" or enlightened beings?

Strange they have so many millions of dollars, so many servants and slave workers, and yet still don't employee a professional or official historian.

Problem is, I guess, they just cannot tell the whole truth.

[* "Piyu", name given to a spirit entity who used to appear and speak through various young BK women at early seances and reveal secret actions and personal thoughts of Om Mandli members to the group (a term most likely coming from Sufi influences which were common in the Sind) who they seemingly thought was also Lekhraj Kirpalani.]
Offline

GuptaRati 6666

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2015

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post19 Mar 2017

Cool cowboy hats for Dadi Janki and Kumaka Dadi. I know of the history of service in the United States. That's because I was part and parcel of it. I does not matter to me if the BKs think that by erasing my name from their history books that my name will be erased from all the books of history. It is quite the opposite. I respect the god-spirit as I would any entity who would come into this dimension and establish an organization for spiritual service. I have learned not to trust many of the officials of the BK establishment, including their version of history and their own history.

If I give too many details, my identity will be revealed and though I respect the god-spirit, I have parted with the BK establishment.

Kumaki Dadi did visit the USA in the summer of 1977. On her visit to NYC Kumaki Dadi must have had a cultural shock and condemned the Big Apple also called the Big Mango as the capitol of Kaliyug. There was around that time a massive power failure, which BKs attributed to Kumak Dadi's thought powers. One reason why San Antonio became the second official center was because of a Sindhi family and many Gujrat families.

Errol from Guyana who had visited Madhuban in the winter of 1977, matriculated to Tuskegee University in the fall of 1977. He started a meditation group on campus and in 1980 Barbara Moore a native of Alabama allowed her newly built home to become the BK raj Yoga center. Errol arrived at Tuskegee in August of 1977 for veterinary studies. Mohani Panjabi arrived in New York City in the early fall of 1977. The BKs were able to gain NGO status in 1977.

In the early winter of 1978, Denise and Chandru drove by car to San Antonio and established the center in San Antonio. While establishing service in San Antonio, they visited Tuskegee in the spring of 1978 to assist Errol and Barbara with the service in Alabama. For almost two years, the apartments rented by Errol served as the raj Yoga center at Tuskegee, until Barbara converted her home into a center. Denise and Chandru spent a week at Tuskegee.

When Denise and Chandru departed San Antonio in the fall of 1978, there was a void, with respect to an experienced teacher. Hansa must have been a BK for a year or two and dealing with her divorce. In the early winter of 1979, Simon Vivian arrived in San Antonio from London. Denise and Chandru spent several years in San Fran, CA.

Errol completed his pre-veterinary and veterinary studies in 1984, completed an internship in Altanta, Georgia and post-doctoral training at the Carver Research Center in Tuskegee. In the mid-summer, he returned to Guyana and was appointed a veterinary officer, working for the Guyana Government who funded his university studies.

He initially spent 2-3 weeks at the Georgetown raj Yoga center. His lokik family and relatives had not seen him for almost a decade, and though he was not home sick, he accepted an invitation from his mom and dad to board and lodge with them. As a veterinary doctor, he found life at the center entropic and did not attend many morning classes. His absence seemed conspicuous, since before his studies he attended morning and evening classes, even in the most stormy weather.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9342
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post20 Mar 2017

GuptaRati 6666 wrote:One reason why San Antonio became the second official center was because of a Sindhi family and many Gujrat families.

As in, they could tap some of their money to support them.

I see mention of the Tuskegee centre in old books but it seems to have closed now.

There was another centre in the USA that managed to elicit a large donation from a local Indian businessman. From memory, I think it ws $50,000. Big Mohini from NYC, who had nothing to do with the earning of it, turned up to accept the cheque and promptly flew away with it back to NYC, where "Baba needed it more" apparently leaving the local Sister floundering to explain to the donor where it went.

Seemingly she left the BKs not long after and centre floundered.

Do you know which centre it might be, or what happened to the Sister?
Offline
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1840
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post20 Mar 2017

Lying toe rags.

I met Big Mohini, she was the grooviest senior I ever met! Obviously complicit in deception tbough.

I went to the retreat center in the Catskill Mountains before it was ready for the public ... amazing place.

It had a disused ballroom and many interesting features, amazing walks there and lovely people too.

Even though they couldn't understand our Essex accents.
Offline

GuptaRati 6666

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2015

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post21 Mar 2017

My apologies to Rick in Tampa, Florida and his role in the service in the pan handle area. I have not set foot in a center in almost three decades and that's OK. The center in Tuskegee most likely closed because Barbara made her transition about five or more years ago due to cancer.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9342
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post22 Mar 2017

What is the claimed quote according the BKWSU, and where did it come from?
Nijanand Rupam Shivoham Shivoham
Gyan Swarupam Shivoham Shivoham
Prakash Swarupam Shivoham Shivoham

It seems inspired by the "Atma Shatakam" written by the Adi Sankaracharya as an explanation for his theory of non-dualism, a Vedantic doctrine called Advaita that identifies the individual self (atman) with the brahman.

"Shivoham" means “I am Shiva”, however, in the original context, Shiva meant the pure unbounded all-pervading consciousness; the transcendental self, the Absolute or Brahman.

The BKs have chosen to interpret this is an absolutely literal manner, a "supreme being" modelled after human consciousness, identifying itself as being called "Shiva". This is certainly not what it meant (of course, the BKs will just say they are right and everyone else is wrong).
“Shiva Swarupam” — my nature is Shiva. My form is Shiva. I am made up of a substance that is Shiva — the innermost me, not another third party.

In its original form, "shivoham" refers to the theorised 'ultimate reality' underlying all phenomena. An infinite formlessness from which all forms in the visible reality arose.

This is actually congruent with the beliefs the Om Mandlites had for their first 20 odd years, of there being no god figure but a supreme state of infinite "divine light". Paramdham as they call it now.

There is a short version that goes
Soham, Shivoham, Aham-Brahma-Asmi Mahavakya, Shuddha, Sat-chit-ananda, Purna Para Brahma, Chidanandarupah Shivoham Shivoham.

I am He, I am Shiva, I am Brahman, Pure, existence-knowledge-bliss, all-full Self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva of the form of knowledge and bliss.

Aham-Brahma-Asmi was their original mantra/slogan. Again taken from Advaita Hinduism.

It's strange and confused because Advaita and Lekhraj Kirpalani's original the Vaishnavite tendencies (Krishna worship) are pretty much oppositional and yet they appear to have borrowed many of the concepts from Advaita to apply to their later god spirit ... while at the same time weaving a story that included the channelled being called Piyu who spoke through their early spirit mediums.

Was Lekhraj Kirpalani, or Jagdish Chander attempting some kind of syncretism of various Hindu schools, or was he just stealing their ideas for the sake of marketing? I tend to believe the latter. Anything to blow their own trumpet.

In Sanskrit, the original slokas goes ...
Adi Shankaracharya wrote:Mano budhyahankara chithaa ninaham,
Na cha srothra jihwe na cha graana nethrer,
Na cha vyoma bhoomir na thejo na vayu,
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    Neither am I mind, nor intelligence ,
    Nor ego, nor thought,
    Nor am I ears or the tongue or the nose or the eyes,
    Nor am I earth or sky or air or the light,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Na cha praana sangno na vai pancha vaayuh,
Na vaa saptha dhathur na va pancha kosa,
Na vak pani padam na chopastha payu,
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    Neither am I the movement due to life,
    Nor am I the five airs, nor am I the seven elements,
    Nor am I the five internal organs,
    Nor am I voice or hands or feet or other organs,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Na me dwesha raghou na me lobha mohou,
Madho naiva me naiva matsarya bhava,
Na dharmo na cha artha na kamo na moksha,
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    I never do have enmity or friendship,
    Neither do I have vigour nor feeling of competition,
    Neither do I have assets, or money or passion or salvation,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Na punyam na paapam na soukhyam na dukham,
Na manthro na theertham na veda na yagna,
Aham bhojanam naiva bhojyam na bhoktha,
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    Never do I have good deeds or sins or pleasure or sorrow,
    Neither do I have holy chants or holy water or holy books or fire sacrifice,
    I am neither food or the consumer who consumes food,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Na mruthyur na sankha na me jathi bhedha,
Pitha naiva me naiva matha na janma,
Na bhandhur na mithram gurur naiva sishyah,
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    I do not have death or doubts or distinction of caste,
    I do not have either Father or mother or even birth,
    And I do not have relations or friends or teacher or students,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Aham nirvi kalpo nirakara roopo,
Vibhuthwascha sarvathra sarvendriyanaam,
Na chaa sangatham naiva mukthir na meyah
Chidananada Roopa Shivoham, Shivoham.
    I am one without doubts, I am without form,
    Due to knowledge I do not have any relation with my organs,
    And I am always redeemed,
    Knowledgeful and blissful, I am Shiva, I am Shiva
Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1296
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post23 Mar 2017

In its original form, "shivoham" refers to the theorised 'ultimate reality' underlying all phenomena. An infinite formlessness from which all forms in the visible reality arose.

This is the basis of why practitioners and theoretical researchers in (what used to be called) ”the new physics” in the 1980s (now just physics) were enamoured with many Hindu texts. The most successful populariser of this at the time was Fritjof Capra, best known for ”The Tao of Physics” which used the Shiva Natraj sculpture on the cover of many editions.

The idea of ”the 'ultimate reality' underlying all phenomena” has been explored further, and we have today Dr Lawrence Krauss explaining the cosmology in ”A Universe from Nothing” - where he also basically says, there was always something, but we tend to think of ”things” as tangibly substantial.

"An infinite formlessness ..."

So when matter emerges, coagulates, from the energies involved in atomic and sub-atomic activity, we could say in layman’s tems that the matter has come from ‘nothing'. Especially since that realm is beyond normal human senses and is only perceived with mathematics, and only ”sensed" by us via complex instrumentation and interpretation of those signals. That book was partly written as a kind of scientific refutation of the theistic argument that there needs to be a creator/prime mover/initiator because otherwise how does something (the material universe a.k.a. "the creation”) come out of nothing?

His view is that many people ‘superstitiously' misconstrue the implications of Big Bang based on outdated understandings; that quantum physics and continuing recent regular new discoveries of black holes, pulsars and quasars have changed what we know about the universe; that these once rarely observed phenomena are now ubiquitous, an almost countless number of these are being observed, constantly converting matter to energy and vice versa.

Shiva is a latecomer in the Hindu pantheon. The post-Shankaracharya Vedantins were often accused by other Hindu philosophers of being crypto-buddhists. In the slokas, you could replace the word Shiva with ”sunyata” or with ”anatta” or even with ”neti neti”.

The paradox of vedanta is in the line "Neither am I mind, nor intelligence, Nor ego ... I am Shiva”. That still holds on to some concept of a constant self, which is essentially the ego function. That is, to say ”I am” and ”not ego” is a non-sequiter.

In Buddhist Vinaya, rules of the monastic life, it is considered to be breaking the rule against lying if you say ”I am enlightened” or ”I have no ego”.

The variety of cosmic symbolism of Shiva in various Hindu traditions is definitely perverted by any idea of there being an actual being, an entity called Shiva. If there is some ”spirit/vapour” going around, well, being called the same name does not mean its the same thing. If I call my dog Jesus, he’s not the same as the figure believed in by Christians. By their acts do you know them? If my dog saves me from drowning, he may be a ”saviour”, but he’s still not the Jesus Christ.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9342
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post23 Mar 2017

Therefore, to link to the other topic "Who created Shiva?", did the BKs invent their 'Shiv Baba' to give personality to, and as a "cosmic symbolism" of, their previous formless divine light?

I am not sure about this most recent of segueing from Piyu into Shiv Baba ... or rather Piyu, into God Brahma (as it was not apparently not apparent during the Brahma years, into Shiv Baba/BapDada during the Sister Gulzar years.

Who knows ... perhaps they will find their way back to the infinite, formless, divine light eventually and be forced by circumstances to relinquish their dotty god?

You're on a different path now that's kind of off topic in this thread ... but would an trully egoless god, as the BKs claims theirs is, make his first words on earth boasts about how wonderful and blissful he himself is? And has he actually gone on to prove that he is the knowledgeful etc?

I mean, if I walked into a room full of strangers and said, "Hi, I am ex-l and I am the blissful, knowledgeful and egoless one!"

They'd all think I was a plonker.

And why the changes in interests and personality ... from snooping into people's private thoughts and actions in seances as Piyu, to disappearing behind Lekhraj Kirpalani, to the repetitive rambles of Gulzar?

Guys, it really is stretching the imagination a little too far to accept this is 'The God Father', however much you have invested into that PR spin.

* (Almost as far as the Shankaracharya stories, e.g. Shankaracharya goes into a blacksmith and drinks a crucible full of molten iron and then says to his devotees, "Now you do that, or stop calling yourself Shiva too").
Offline

GuptaRati 6666

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2015

Re: BKs Reinvent Their History Yet Again: 1936 becomes 1948

Post26 Mar 2017

Pink and Ex-I your recent posts have many valid points.

Ex-I, yours on the BKs supreme being not equal to Almighty God is clearly articulated. Pink, your idea of a savior of souls cannot always be Yesuah. It seems that the BKs can be interacting with energies that they have been erroneously classifying.

The ABC of Raj Yoga are pinnacles truth, which are universal, though there are questions on the 5000 year duration of The Cycle. A = atma; B = Baba or Supreme; and C = chakra or cycle. One aspect of The Cycle debate is the perception of time in the known multiple dimensions.

Daniel Shehan delivers an excellent presentation on UFO that offers insights into distinguishing the islands universal truths and the seas of uncertainties in BK philosophy. Daniel Sheehan: UFOs and the Cosmic Perspective - Dec 15, 2014

Return to The BKWSU

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mahendrakumar and 12 guests