The Cycle, belief in identical world events every 5000 years

So from what I am getting in the cyclic theory, we cannot measure the "fairness" in the physical world. Although we see so much apparent unfairness.

Also those mosquito human souls will only take birth for 1 day and die during Destruction. The reason that "it happened to them last Kalpa" is not acceptable to me. The reason is, "that merged tendency" to have their mosquito role in the world drama, is PART AND PARCEL of that specific mosquito human soul.

Is that right logic based on PBK view?

How do you make a relative measurement in a matterless infinity or is Paramdham not infinite?

It is that Paramdham comes in this world and it is a matter of such a stage. That this soul of Shiva, whilst he is in a body, has such a high stage of the intellect that no one else in this world has. The more our intellect is close to this material world, objects of matter, the body etc ... the less is it soul-conscious. The soul of Shiva is always soul-conscious and He does not think of anything - like food - clothes, body, he does not eat, drink he does not experience anything.

So, if you take a scale between this consciousness and the most body-conscious soul one can measure high and low. Yes, high and low are matter of here on earth in the body. Effort does not change or create our own or anyone's role. Effort is to get to know the role, then maybe one is happy with it, because no one plays your role, everyone has his good days.

Although we see so much apparent unfairness

For whom ... Muslims say it is fair.

Where do simple Cycles fit in nature apart from mechanical functions?

From large, observable phenomena (planets cycling our sun) to the smallest (protons and electrons cycle the nucleus in an atom), the mechanics and nature of our universe we see is cyclical. The weather seasons cycle. The spinning (cycle) of the earth provides our day/night cycle. The moon's cycle affects the tides. Women's menstrual periods cycle. These are laws of interdependent nature in time. Einstein postulated that space/time is curved, that if you threw a line out into space it would eventually return on itself (circle/cycle).

All Gyan is saying is that the universe (and everything in it) is in a cycle of time.

From large, observable phenomena (planets cycling our sun) to the smallest (protons and electrons cycle the nucleus in an atom), the mechanics and nature of our universe we see is cyclical. The weather seasons cycle. The spinning (cycle) of the earth provides our day/night cycle. The moon's cycle affects the tides. Women's menstrual periods cycle. These are laws of interdependent nature in time. Einstein postulated that space/time is curved, that if you threw a line out into space it would eventually return on itself (circle/cycle).

Hello Diogenes, welcome on board! Always nice to have new atmic energy in the forum. If you are an ex-, it'll be great to hear your story when you are ready.

OK ... I hear what you are saying, so don't think I am putting you down. I just want to get to the bottom of all this.

• Sub-atomic and space-time I am not so hot on but if we look at planetary cycles they wobble and they are eliptical. From my basic science e.g., I think it take 28,000 years for the earth to complete some kind of cycle to get back to where it started and by that time, if you were to draw it out, it would look like a ball of wool.
• Weather, each season is different from the next one in sequence. None are identical. I think that goes back to what the Brother is saying, is it a cycle or is it the circumference of a progressing spiral or tunnel passing through space-time.
• Menstrual cycle, in name alone. Sure, I get the connection with the moon but they start a zero and ends as zero and mine are never a regular 28 days.
• Spinning atoms ... I don't know. Do they change and slow down over time?

It appears to me that at each level and within each there is variation and that variation expands over a possible eternal time to vast randomnesses. We have the idea of entropy within the material universe ... no BK has ever squared up for me how it is all mean to rise from its lowest state to it highest state. Or taking the BK hypotheses, translated as "Shiva does *SOMETHING*", no one has explained how energy passed from the Supreme Soul into matter ( ... or why the Supreme Soul does not deplete).

"The Grand Unified Theory of Gyan" is still waiting there to be written.

Sub-atomic and space-time I am not so hot on but if we look at planetary cycles they wobble and they are eliptical. From my basic science e.g., I think it take 28,000 years for the earth to complete some kind of cycle to get back to where it started and by that time, if you were to draw it out, it would look like a ball of wool.

Meaning, our planetary system is not on a plane, not flat! The planetary systems and galaxies themselves are moving outwards from the center of the universe at an unimaginable speed. And so there will be slight variation on the revolution of every body around another body (like the sun).

• Spinning atoms ... I don't know. Do they change and slow down over time?

You mean spinning electron??? Try introducing a reactive element, and see what happens to that atom. It becomes a molecule with different molecular orbital. Try introducing a cosmic ray to a spinning atom, and see how its parts (electrons, protons and neutrons) get knocked off.

The absolute nature of cyclic mechanism maybe possible only in an isolated system. E.g. A SINGLE spinning hydrogen proton in "space". No gravity, no EM force, no magnetism, no other flying subatomic particles. Yeah, the spinning proton might be undergoing a "perfect" cyclic spin. Do you think such system exists? Of course not.

If our universe is isolated, then it is possible for it to undergo cyclic changes in terms of mass and energy contents as defined by E=Morning Class^2. Cyclic changes are abstract concepts, mathematical profiles of changing quantities. It is like fitting all those "data points" and coming up with a "regression curve" that resembles a sine wave, i.e. a perfect cycle.

All other systems (galactic, planetary, global, atomic and subatomic) are OPEN, and therefore, it cannot remain "cyclic" forever in their own "little cycles". You see we are talking of relative cycles here that are functions of time.

Cyclic is relative on how you want to view things. If it is a reality that the universe will undergo BIG CRUNCH, then BIG BANG, then BIG CRUNCH, then BIG BANG, ad infinitum, then TRULY you can say you have an "absolute cyclic phrase" - BIG CRUNCH-BIG BANG cycle!

The cyclic model is purely mathematical, an abstract concept, or philosphical. It is a representation of a change where the beginning meets the end through eternity.

Hello Diogenes, welcome on board! Always nice to have new atmic energy in the forum. If you are an ex-, it'll be great to hear your story when you are ready.

Hi ex-l, I've posted some of my tale in the Honour Roll thread.

OK ... I hear what you are saying, so don't think I am putting you down. I just want to get to the bottom of all this.

I don't think you're putting me down by questioning. I'll just tell you what I know.

And before I begin - while most of us here are ex BK, I am an ex BK who doesn't feel the need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I know a lot of what I learned regarding the meditation and knowlege is profoundly valuable. I couldn't come to terms with where the Brahmin Family is at on my two occasions. I don't know what that says about me in the scheme of things, and I've learned not to care. I don't feel the need to 'belong', though it would have been nice, and I don't feel the need to ever again put myself in a position where I am at the mercy of their system of family. I don't blame Baba/God for human failings either.

• Sub-atomic and space-time I am not so hot on but if we look at planetary cycles they wobble and they are eliptical.

Whether their plane changes or they wobble is immaterial. The thing here is that they represent point to point cycles in time.

From my basic science e.g., I think it take 28,000 years for the earth to complete some kind of cycle to get back to where it started and by that time, if you were to draw it out, it would look like a ball of wool.

The significant thing is, it's in the process of cycling throughout the time available.
The earth getting back to exactly where it started from is not important in the universal scheme (so its scenario is academic in that regard). When the universe is ready to turn to light again, it does so . I'll address that in more detail later.

• Weather, each season is different from the next one in sequence. None are identical. I think that goes back to what the Brother is saying, is it a cycle or is it the circumference of a progressing spiral or tunnel passing through space-time.

The seasons cycle. None is an identical season to the last (entropy) but they keep cycling throughout the Kalpa.

• Menstrual cycle, in name alone. Sure, I get the connection with the moon but they start a zero and ends as zero and mine are never a regular 28 days.

Irregular cycle, is still a cycle, point to point, longer or shorter.

• Spinning atoms ... I don't know. Do they change and slow down over time?[/list]It appears to me that at each level and within each there is variation and that variation expands over a possible eternal time to vast randomnesses. We have the idea of entropy within the material universe ...

Entropy, exactly. The spiritual vibration and material vibration degrade interdependently, hand in hand, hence the yuga cycle.

The story of Adam and Eve being cast from God's presence in the garden of Eden is folklore remembering the catastrophic shift from the end of Silver Age (our Deity consciouness depleted) into Copper Age (our worship consciousness - bhagat- beginning ).

no, BK has ever squared up for me how it is all mean to rise from its lowest state to it highest state. Or taking the BK hypotheses, translated as "Shiva does *SOMETHING*", no one has explained how energy passed from the Supreme Soul into matter (... or why the Supreme Soul does not deplete).

I put the question to a soul I knew who was rarely around, being feted in Madhuban much of the time, but who I knew had access to the information. I remember asking
"If the earth goes through a transformation each 5000 years, what happens to things like the voyager space probe which left our galaxy (or was about to at the time I think). His answer was as above, " the universe turns to light" and 'It's the seed of our pure Yoga power which does it". I thought I'd done well enough to get a specific answer and did not bug him for further details. I'd understood mind over matter for a long time. I did some churning to apply it to Gyan and a universal scale.

Shiva does his thing throughout 'Confluence' Age. On us. He cannot do anything by himself, only if we're connected to him. He's incorporeal, we're the one's affecting the corporeal realm.

ShivBaba doesn't 'deplete' because, being in the incorporeal realm, he is not subject to material decay/entropy. He is subject to time, which is why he becomes actively 'awake' during the confluence. He is part of the universal drama cycle, and plays his role.

We change the matter of the universe by the purifying of our consciousness, and it only takes the particular level of our vibration to achieve it.

As you'll remember from the Murli, souls of impure vibration cannot enter the period of pure vibration/light in The Cycle (they have to remain in the incorporeal realm until their vibration is harmonius with matter). Just as so, degraded Iron Age has a particular vibration point where it cannot withstand the seed of intensely pure consciousness. This is what Baba has been trying to get us to do. We are (whoever is connected to him) the seed that splits the universal atom.

ShivBaba/God is the source. That's his role from the incorporeal realm. This is why when you meditate you are a world server. And (as the action/reaction- Law of Karma denotes) as a world server at this level, you will be served by the world you helped create, numberwise and according to effort.

If/when you are able to accept that the relationship between consciousness and matter is the key, the 'science' of it all becomes secondary to a large extent. Personally, I enjoy the science of it as a form of entertainment. The dinosaur question is one I am interested in getting into discussion about.

I hope this info is of help to you ex-l.

On the issue of time and The Cycle being 5000 years. If you've ever had the experience of the Subtle Region, or the incorporeal realm, in meditation you'll understand that time is relative. It appears non existent in those states. And being it is that state of consciousness which brings about the Golden Age earth, matter then is the product of the purest, subtle energy to exist. Relative to how we experience time today (Iron Age), we don't remember how long a subtle (light) matter year is. And there are 2500 of them. From my own experiences in meditation, I suspect the experience will be timeless for the soul - up until the big crunch which begins Copper Age.

On the Law of Karma - just think cause and effect, Newton's 3rd Law of Motion = for every action there is an equal, opposite reaction.

If you're frustrated by Gyan points of knowledge because you haven't understood, that's one thing. If you retire into cynical denial/disproving of them while you haven't understood, that's another.

I liken it to gravity. You know it's there. Dissect it and howl about it all you like, but the bottom line is, only a fool actively ignores it.

It takes a bit of courage to sit in front of God/Baba with an honest, open heart. Warts and all. But that's the first step where ever you are coming from. And like anythng, you get stronger by practicing it. You cannot blame the BK family/system for your not doing that. And if that's where your problem really lies, no amount of resentment, denial or bitter discussion on here is going to produce you a silk purse from a sow's ear.

So, how does the star get put back there for the same time next cycle?

Here's a short quote from the 'Electric Universe 'site of Australian Physicist, Wal Thornhill, on how stars are formed. I found it a really good read;

The Electric Universe

"Plasma physicists argue that stars are formed by an electromagnetic "pinch" effect on widely dispersed gas and dust. The "pinch" is created by the magnetic force between parallel current filaments that are part of the huge electric currents flowing inside a galaxy. It is far more effective than gravity in concentrating matter and, unlike gravity, it can remove excess angular momentum that tends to prevent collapse. Stars will form like beads on a wire until gravity takes over."

If this is, in fact, how stars are formed it goes someway to providing an answer to your question. I imagine at 'power up' (beginning of each cycle) all those stars form at their identical points between the current filaments, throughout the universe.

On the issue of time and The Cycle being 5000 years. If you've ever had the experience of the Subtle Region, or the incorporeal realm, in meditation you'll understand that time is relative. It appears non existent in those states. And being it is that state of consciousness which brings about the Golden Age earth, matter then is the product of the purest, subtle energy to exist. Relative to how we experience time today (Iron Age), we don't remember how long a subtle (light) matter year is. And there are 2500 of them. From my own experiences in meditation, I suspect the experience will be timeless for the soul - up until the big crunch which begins Copper Age.

On the Law of Karma - just think cause and effect, Newton's 3rd Law of Motion = for every action there is an equal, opposite reaction. If you're frustrated by Gyan points of knowledge because you haven't understood, that's one thing. If you retire into cynical denial/disproving of them while you haven't understood, that's another. I liken it to gravity. You know it's there. Dissect it and howl about it all you like, but the bottom line is, only a fool actively ignores it.

It takes a bit of courage to sit in front of God/Baba with an honest, open heart. Warts and all. But that's the first step where ever you are coming from. And like anythng, you get stronger by practicing it. You cannot blame the BK family/system for your not doing that. And if that's where your problem really lies, no amount of resentment, denial or bitter discussion on here is going to produce you a silk purse from a sow's ear.

Suppose we set aside the question of fact and consider the impact on the believers. If believing in the BK knowledge and practicing it, opening your heart to God. If these really and dramatically changed people in a way that was qualitatively and quantitatively superior to other paths, we might expect this "knowledge" to become as popular and respected as, for example, penicillin.

"Even tho it is simple and works, only a few are fated to understand it. Gyan will not sit in the intellect of the impure."

All well and good, but think for a minute that your vision of others as impure puts you below the people you silently judge.

One problem with believing in The Cycle is that it becomes necessary to view all scientists (many brilliant, inquisitive people) as deluded and self-deluding. This judgment harms the seeker, who by judging others loses the ability to accept all aspects of his or her own self. Many lose this without missing it at all! Judging others offers an easy escape from relating. Judgment insulates oneself against vulnerability. My tribe is good and right, others are wrong and degraded.

It is a rare individual who can accept the idea of others as full of sin, vice and impurity, while still being open. Judgment is a far worse poison, to my mind, than for example, eating meat, or sexual arousal and release: the latter are not, in my experience, intrinsically harmful.

Here's a short quote from the 'Electric Universe 'site of Australian Physicist, Wal Thornhill, on how stars are formed. I found it a really good read.

Ha! A Velikovskian. Could be interesting ... I am always willing to doff my hat to a heretic, especially one whose work exhibit how members of particular academic disciplines reacted to ideas from workers from outside their field.

Excuse me if other responsibilities, and a lack of grounding in orthodox science, carry me away from pursuing this topic but I will be interested to read others thoughts though.

One problem with believing in The Cycle is that it becomes necessary to view all scientists (many brilliant, inquisitive people) as deluded and self-deluding. This judgment harms the seeker, who by judging others loses the ability to accept all aspects of his or her own self. Many lose this without missing it at all! Judging others offers an easy escape from relating. Judgment insulates oneself against vulnerability. My tribe is good and right, others are wrong and degraded.

People used to believe the world was flat. We cannot always hold onto old ideas, just because of not wanting to disrespect scientists. How do we know that science won't lead to the 5,000 cycle idea, eventually anyway. Science is not yet concluded.

I find it ridiculous to accept contradicting theories and just say ... I don't have the answer. Well, who are we trying to fool here except ourselves.

Does anyone have the answer. I certainly haven't heard it. Whether I have an answer or not doesn't change whether the ideas of Karma and Drama as explained in the Murlis are right or wrong.

To me it is a more complete theory than any I have heard before or since, the emphasis here is 'to me'. Maybe for those that have a strong scientific mind/way of thinking the ideas of Gyan will be difficult to accept. Again for me I don't hold scientists in such a high regard because science is not yet concluded and may still be in it's infancy.

How do we know that science won't lead to the 5,000 cycle idea, eventually anyway?

Because it is unprovable.

Proof is entirely exclude from its conception. As soon as it is proved, the clock will have ticked, 6 Billion will be dead and no one in the Golden Age will be interested or able to understand because they are only 1 second old.

And its a very clever, but transparent, trick because only those that havelived the full 5,000 years (the 900,000) will undertand or believe. All the rest of humanity will doubt it because they have no possible way of having experienced it.

Its a mental plug to stop the mind chattering so that the Supreme Spook can channel whatever it is he or they are channelling, through the minds of the BKs. The 5,000 years is a bit like the trick the stage hypnotists use to see if you are hypno-suggestible, e.g. if you lock your fingers together and cannot undo them, the hypnotist knows that you are suggestible. In the BKWSU, Shiva says 5,000 years and if you swallow that, then you will swallow anything. It is a only a mental block and has no other value than that.

"Who am I ... where did I come from ... what am I doing here ...", these are all the cores of deep mental chatter. They need to shut up with an answer. Any old answer. It does not really matter what. So the he, or they, give answers that are culturally referenced to plug those unanswerable questions so that our minds can be used for conduits to channel what ever it is they are channelling and for what ever reason it is they are chanelling it. They are only really interested in individuals that have a little extra bandwidth, e.g. individuals that have got basic life out of the way and under their belt and are not overly concerned with mere existence and they are very interested in individuals that high output capacity, e.g. mics. So they develop philosophical patterns that fit our requirements to shut our inquiring faculties down to allow our broadcasting faculties, both receiving and sending, to operate at a peak level.

We get sucked into BK Raja Yoga in particular because we like purity, simplicity, symmetry and order hence the simple, symmetrical, repetitive concept. We are also particularly attracted to the idea of being worship worthy deities and living in a comfortable heaven and willing to gamble our lot to get it. We are open individuals and this is consciously encouraged to the point of naivety. "Don't believe ... just temporarily suspend your disbelief ... see how it feels", is the siren's call.

Once we open and let it or them in then the honeymoon drug kicks in ... and we are hooked. For a while.

A long answer John but a complete one. My short answer is it is immaterial. To debate the issue of 5,000 years is missing the point. It is not about the number of years, it is about what the method yukti is being used for in the first place.

Besides which, time is relative. What is it being measured against? There is no big Swiss clock outside of the material universe ticking its 5,000 x ticks. File under "flat earth" and "moon made of cheese" ... and look in the other direction for the real answer. He, or they are even happy for the debate or contention that such an unprovable or ridiculous concept provoks because it keep mental traffic passing back them them. It is their identifier. If mental traffic comes back saying "5,000 years" ... that goes to Shiva, if mental traffic comes back saying "Moses and the flood" ... then that goes back to Jahweh. He, or they, seem to feed off or travel through our thoughts as though they were the copper cables of transmission.

One problem with believing in The Cycle is that it becomes necessary to view all scientists (many brilliant, inquisitive people) as deluded and self-deluding. This judgment harms the seeker, who by judging others loses the ability to accept all aspects of his or her own self. Many lose this without missing it at all! Judging others offers an easy escape from relating. Judgment insulates oneself against vulnerability. My tribe is good and right, others are wrong and degraded.

People used to believe the world was flat. We cannot always hold onto old ideas, just because of not wanting to disrespect scientists. How do we know that science won't lead to the 5,000 cycle idea, eventually anyway. Science is not yet concluded.

So in general, you can account for reasons to discount people who've spent much more time, and in an environment where views can compete. In general, the theories explain the evidence better, and can be tested and verified, are accepted. We don't have arguments about the basic principles of metallurgy or blast furnaces.

Would you deny the circulation of the blood? Would you deny the implications of pock-marked satellites of Saturn?

Discounting means deciding without a willingness to examine conflicting evidence in detail.

Science might lead to the 5,000 year cycle, but it seems unlikely to me that the work of astronomical physicists in determining the age of the planets and celestial objects will be overturned. Evolution, too, has a huge amount of evidence amassed, much much more than in Darwin's time. Radioactive dating provides similar results for fossils belonging to similar strata. Ice cores and tree rings also tell much of earth's history.

I joined the debate with some scientifically educated people, I discussed, and was open, and concluded they were right about certain things. But don't worry. Most people on the planet believe arbitrary things, and it doesn't make all that much difference. You (nor anyone) are unlikely to change their driving habits. It is these habits that are going to bring the future. The polar bears and their friends care much more about people's driving habits than spiritual practices. In terms of driving habits, BKs are the same as any others, in aggregate, from the point of view of the polar bears who are losing their summer ice hunting grounds.

I think I am writing mostly to entertain myself. Probably you can make yourself win the argument to your satisfaction. A great quality of some scientists and few among the religious faithful is willingness to change their views if substantially challenged. I personally have drawn strength from accepting challenges to my beliefs about the world.

It was science that disproved the idea that the world was flat.

It was science that disproved the idea that the world was flat

Yes correct, as science evolves old ideas are overturned.

So in general, you can account for reasons to discount people who've spent much more time, and in an environment where views can compete. In general, the theories explain the evidence better, and can be tested and verified, are accepted.

No, I can only account to myself and express my belief. Two things that are important to that are I believe Shiva is God and has knowledge beyond time and science. As to how much knowledge in actual scientific terms, I don't know but I don't see the importance of Shiva having to have knowledge of every detail and knowing how the exact mechanics of the material universe work.

The other is that I think science is developing and will continue to develop with new ideas, bringing new understanding to the material universe. One of the ideas I find interesting is the one that animals have hidden genes which could allow them to change species quicker than was proposed before, evolution of hundreds of years rather than thousands.

A great quality of some scientists and few among the religious faithful is willingness to change their views if substantially challenged. I personally have drawn strength from accepting challenges to my beliefs about the world.

I agree, I think it should be challenged, but I do not see anyway for BKs to give any more of an answer based on the available Murlis. Maybe the hidden Murlis might have more information.