Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

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

smonika

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2013

Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post21 Jan 2013

ex-l wrote:"Typical, a BK joins the forum and the first thing they do is lie about their connection to the BKWSU.

First and foremost of all. I am not a BK ... ma'm, a supporter of their ideology rather, who's been studying this spiritual knowledge for some time now. I accidently stumbled upon this forum while browsing some of BKs' "genuine" links n after going through some of the blogs posted here, I feel, it's worth joining, for it provides some debatable points. :).
"affinity to the BKWSU: media or academic"

wouldn't n M.phil student be considered under "academic"? or are there some other criteria(not stated clearly) being applied for categorizing the joiners?
"education subnormal by the quality of their writing, and logic"

probably you had better use "simple" because simplicity is often called subnormal when we can not take down something which doesn't involve any complexity. Logic is "art of reasoning" ... which has taken quite a circuitous route in your case, as is proved in your statement
"No, just because we might be "souls", there is no logic to state there might be one Supreme Soul. That is a BKism (as is "souls playing a role"). There could no no Supreme Soul, there could be a hierarchy of many supreme souls, as we are discussing elsewhere, god could be something entirely different from how the Brahma Kumaris conceive it.

Logic says there "should" be "a" Supreme Soul, for there can be just "one" to whom superlatives - ultimate, unique, perfect, epitome (etc) be applied! Even if there be many supreme souls, again the concept of "coordinator of all supremes" demands attention. Why the hypothesis of "oneness" is getting difficult to be taken down by you, I wonder. By the same logic, you would have denied having "one" brain in your body but as it is a scientifically proven fact, you would not like to challenge it!!! Even an atheist like "ALBERT EINSTEIN" conceded in some of his newly-found manuscripts that "there surely is some spiritual force governing this universe" but hard-core truth is still to be established by nowadays scientists. THE ONLY WAY WE ARE LEFT WITH TO GET UP TO THE TRUTH IS "OUR OWN" EXPERIENCE but if you failed to experience, no reasoning can satisfy you ever. Not even any scientific breakthrough which might some day validate this hypotheses!
"The purpose of this forum is for protecting non-BKs by exposing the true teachings of the BKWSU, helping individuals leave the BKWSU, or promoting the reform of the BKWSU. If you are not interested in one of those three, please leave now."

if you are a true reformer, my presence should not bother you.
thanx :)
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 7988
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post21 Jan 2013

smonika wrote:First and foremost of all. I am not a BK ... ma'm, a supporter of their ideology rather, who's been studying this spiritual knowledge for some time now.

OK, then so you are a 'BK supporter' at the very least and you hid it whereas your way of thinking immediately exposed it ... Please give us a brief introduction including the length and depth of you BK involvement. You've clearly had a considerable exposure to BKism, what is it?

To be honest, I have come across BKs playing such a game before and we have criticised the charades BKs play, pretending to be something else or be independent, to do service.

Just recently I encountered one who said something like, "I prefer to consider than I have no religious affiliation" ... and then it turned out that they had been in the BKs for 22 years and were listed as a sevadhari in the BKWSU. Of course, it's a play on BK various concepts such as, a) they are spiritual not religious, b) they are a family or university, not a religion or a cult, and c) in the Golden Age there is no religion.
wouldn't n M.phil student be considered under "academic"? or are there some other criteria(not stated clearly) being applied for categorizing the joiners?

Well, firstly, if you have a first degree ... write in your best plain English and *never* in txt language. This is the last time you will be told. If you cannot spell very well, write in Word, spell check and then copy and paste back here.

No, "media or academic" is for impartial, independent individuals who are studying the BKWSU with no affiliation. As you have stated, you are at least a 'BK Supporter'. Your way of thinking and idioms shows that you have been deeply influence by BKism.

If you want to prove your integrity and regain some standing here, tell us your BK connection honestly and what you want to do or get out of this forum.
"education subnormal by the quality of their writing, and logic"

No, trust me, it's subnormal ... and disrespectful ... for a M.Phil to spk Lekhraj Kirpalani dis init, "its gud putting ur views n experiences across!"
Logic is "art of reasoning" ... which has taken quite a circuitous route in your case, as is proved in your statement

Firstly, you start with a half-truth or a lie about yourself and hide your BK connection. Secondly, you follow on with an insult .. not a good start.
Logic says there "should" be "a" Supreme Soul ... "ALBERT EINSTEIN" conceded in some of his newly-found manuscripts that "there surely is some spiritual force governing this universe"

OK ... there's an incredibly basic failure there in the form of a fallacy called an "Appeal to Authority. As in Albert Einstein said it so it much be true? Why? And what what Einstein saying? Albert Einstein also said, "I don't believe in God ... It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously". He found the idea "naïve" and "childlike" ... so which Albert Einstein are we writing of? Another BKism ... quote a famous person incorrectly.
Albert Einstein wrote:The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses ... [religion is] a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this ...

if you are a true reformer, my presence should not bother you.

Again, utterly without any grounds in logic. It bothers me because I am a low caste janitor who tidies up all the litter and mess here. It bothers me that you disrespect us with your language. Therefore, if you want to be taken serious, you need to understand that the first way you show respect, is to write in the best English you can manage.
Offline

smonika

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2013

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post24 Jan 2013

Ms. Janitor, when I had already mentioned the word "atheist" what was the point in wasting time over these statements: "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses ... [religion is] a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this ..."? and I also clearly mentioned the word "even" and "newly-found manuscripts" in my statement (seeing this you can yourself analyse as to who needs to be manageable here). You'd have obliged me by making comment on the latter part (that is "some spiritual force governing this universe") :).

And I yet again reiterate the same point ... EXPERIENCE is the biggest authority. I, like many others who search for inner peace, have experienced the link with the Supreme Soul. And being a medical student, I can clearly distinguish between hallucination and the stage in meditation. And the requirement of a red light, dawn time and other stipulations is subjective. May I ask, what experience had you had in your BK-life?

Coming to the vague references you gave in some of your blog, about origin of Shiva; only Gita is said to be echoing some truth about Confluence Age. Your quotations (which seem to have been taken from Shiv PURAN) makes no sense here as they point to "Shankar" (a noted diety in Indian mythology) & not "the incorporeal Shiva".

And please answer this (with manageable logic): "WHY THE OLD TESTAMENT BEING HELD APOCRYPHAL?"

thanx :)
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 7988
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post24 Jan 2013

No, you experienced whatever it was you experienced. You have been told to interpret it as "the Supreme Soul™" by the BKs. There is not any strong evidence to suggest it is, nor that there is one or only one, and even less that the BKs have the monopoly on God that they think they have.

There is just too much evidence to suggest they don't. I don't deny your experience ... but why does it have to be "the Supreme God" ... why not just 'our god', or 'a good god', or even a 'better than average god'? Why does it always have to be so exaggerated ... "global ... supreme ... the one"?

Your only answer is, "he is because he says he is" That is a kind of fallacy, a falsehood, called "Circular Reasoning".


Experience is largely a subjective matter not the same as logic. Logic, to quote the Objectivist Ayn Rand, is "the art of non-contradictory identification", our means to establish what is the truth. Contradictions, failures and subjective esperiences do not make Truth. They may make 'New Improved BK Truth™', but not truth as the rest of the world understands it.

BKs take the words like "supreme", "truth", the name of nearly every Hindu god, and even "God" itself and give them their own, re-invented meanings ... on the basis of what authority?

They take common language and ideas and corrupt them ... turn them right upside down ... for their own purpose; the primary purpose of which is to put them at the top of the caste system by the fact of only them understanding their re-interpreted, re-invented language.
smonika wrote:And please answer this (with manageable logic): "WHY THE OLD TESTAMENT BEING HELD APOCRYPHAL?"

Is it? By whom? And what do you mean by "apocryphal"? Do you mean, "of questionable accuracy", or "relating to the Apocrypha"?

Don't ask me, I am not a Christian or a Jew and, possibly, the only worse god on earth than the BKs' one is the Abrahamic tribal god. No other god has cause so much death and sorrow.


In recent years, the BKs have a developed a service device (yukti) whereby they take a quote from a famous person or VIP and use it for their own ends. At the very least, to make their states sound more important or more education ... more normal in fact. I think it is also because they own gurus don't really say anything very deep, profound or poetic.

To a degree this is illogical and hypocritical because, according to the god of the BKs, those people are all impure, body-conscious, unenlightened shudras souls. If they are rich, famous, or VIPs at the Fag End of the Kali Yuga then probably, by the BK philosophy, they first or second birth souls.
    Why then do the BKs chase after them or use them to promote the BK business, a business the people would not support? It disgusts me.

    Rather than being "of God" the BKs are just becoming asset strippers of other religions and philosophy. They are just like the ship breakers of Alang or Chittagong tearing apart once great vessels for anything that might be of value to them.
I quoted for you what Einstein really said and, to be honest, I agreed with him and could not have said it better.
Albert Einstein wrote:The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses ... [religion is] a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this ...

What are the BKs and their Supreme Soul doing for these people (below)? God Bless the 'Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights' for trying, screw the Brahma Kumaris.

Offline
User avatar

howiemac

ex-BK

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2006
  • Location: Scotland

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post24 Jan 2013

The concept of supremacy is not spiritual, but very worldly, and belonging to the dark side of human nature. This concept is endemic in the BK teachings, and gives the game away (as of course do many other aspects).

However, your implication, ex-l that the BK's God is almost as bad as the God of the Old Testament is disturbing ... The God of the Old Testament is evil, nothing less: brutal and authoritarian, demanding endless blood sacrifices and the genocide of races in its name. Oops, I see where you are coming from ...

(I have a very different vision of the ghost and the unembodied soul that comprise BapDada, but I realise these days that my understanding and experience of them is unrelated to BK doctrine and dogma, and indeed could not have been fostered within a BK environent).
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 7988
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post24 Jan 2013

What is your current opinion of the beings? You might start another topic for it.
howiemac wrote:However, your implication, ex-l that the BK's God is almost as bad as the God of the old testament is disturbing ... Oops, I see where you are coming from ...

Yes, that is right. For me, it is almost as if the same demanding, egotistical God has been wandering the desserts looking for another tribe to possess and come back to try again ... this time using a more subtle approach.

But the end result is the death of 7 Billion and annihilation of everything he does not like or, perhaps, does not understand. The sweetness and light is just a facade, and a means to an end, Dharamraj and Destruction are his purpose.


I do note that the Middle Eastern tribal religions have played the same game of rolling into one god various gods. The god of the Old Testament becomes the god of the New Testament (after a change in medication, one presumes) and then the God of Islam and goes to War .. err Peace ... err War (another change of medication required), and aims conquers the world by out breeding everyone else

For me, it's too much to believe but that is what they have established, one conquering empire building itself on the foundations of the previous conquering one ... and *then* along come the BKs looking to do the same and build their conquering empire, but spanning both the Hindu world and the Abrahamic one (Judaism, Christianity & Islam). It's understandable why if you consider where the Sind is and its history.


These days I only deal with what I can see and can have an seeable effect upon but if I was to accept a spiritual framework, I think I would accept one which went on realm after realm, world after world above and below us. I reject the 'one world, one Cycle' prison the BKs offer us and I reject petty, jealous and demanding "gods".

Now, the question of whether there are such a thing as 'possessing gods', or whether Lekhraj Kirpalani was just caught up amongst psychological archetypes and borrowed ideas from other religions ... whether these gods are living beings or just thought forms ... and at what psychic level. I cannot answer. Obviously Lekhraj Kirpalani *has* also 'just borrowed' ideas and influences ... but the whole religion is awash with his and their tendency towards egotism and self-grandiosity. Everything has to be the biggest, the best, the greatest, global, supreme. It smacks of massive insecurity to me.

It's not possible to argue that logically the Brahma Kumaris god is the Supreme one and, especially, teaching "the supreme knowledge".

Lekhraj Kirpalani saw a cow one day and decided he was the surpreme one ... moo.

Offline
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1707
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Smonika and the "logic" of there being a Supreme Soul

Post25 Jan 2013

Smonika, you sound like someone who is very young and experimenting with ideas, you did mention you are a student and that comes across in your arguements. You sound arrogant and I suggest you have no real experience of the BKs or their teachings, have you read the Murlis?

Return to The BKWSU

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests