arjun wrote:What if someone becomes a BK/PBK after being appointed as a soldier and cannot leave the Army until the bond period is over. In that case he has to definitely follow the orders of his superiors, including the orders to kill the enemy ... .
In the West, there were many incidents of conscientious objectors. Individuals whose spiritual conscience told them that fighting was wrong and who refused to go to war. In the first place, the army, government used to kill them or put them in prison and society persecute them but gradually, over the course of the 20th Century, individuals won the right not to fight and society came to respect them for their strength and their position. In the more developed Western nations such as Germany and Scandinavia, where there is national service, individuals can now chose to do medical or community service instead of military. I am surprised that in Gandhi's India you do not have the choice ... and wonder why the "God of Love" does not encourage individuals to resist killing.
I don't know whether this can be done or not, but I have definitely seen a Murli point where Baba has spoken about the BK/PBK mothers in bondages, who have to suffer forced sex. I think Baba has said that they should remember Baba at that time, then the sin would not accrue to them. But if one indulges in sex just for pleasure, under the pretext that anything could be done in remembrance of God Shiv, then I don't think that would be allowed by Baba. Moreover, have we achieved such a hundred percent soul conscious stage where indulging in sex would not lead to discharge of spiritual and physical power?.
So what is different between doing an action out of a salaried "duty" or servitude and doing an action out of pleasure? What about the solider or policeman that enjoys killing and beating, the general or politician that enjoys making war? Again, we are talking broad principles here. And why did God Shiva like or instruct individuals to just submit to superiors rather than encourage individuals to think for themselves and to take a stand against injustice ... given that most war is entirely bogus and born out of greed and most crime in born out of poverty and a lack of education.
If we correlate this to the other recent thread on the BKWSU's Human Greatness service plan, "America's part in world history reflects the ongoing human struggle of good over evil, order over chaos" ... we see the BKWSU sucking up to the worse aggressor on the planet, one willing to murder 100,000s to feed its greed for oil and one that has built and financed nearly every totalitarian, repressive regime on the planet (including Stalinist Russia). Are America's wars, just wars ... fighting good over evil and to go fight in them soul conscious?
My supposition would be that sex for pleasure and war for profit and gain are in the same category. The are both lusts. Refering to the top of the this thread, what if a sex worker (prostitute) comes into Gyan? Is her work worse than a soldier? Should she give it up or just have remembrance. What is she too has been sold into sex slavery and needs to work her bond off. The pat BKWSU answer is, or was, that sex is worse than murder because in sex, two people were killed. That is the sort of stuff I remember us being told.
I am writing the above line as a BK/PBK. So Ex-BKs please excuse me. They might have a different opinion from me. However, I would seek Baba's answer on this important matter ... I think we cannot equate a soldier killing an enemy under the orders of his Officer or out of patriotism with the suicide bombers/terrorists. The objective and result of the actions in both cases is vastly different. In the former case the killer is defending his homeland or obeying the orders of his Officer, but in the latter case a person is adopting violence on his own to kill enemies/innocent people in the name of God/religion. This may be a subject of debate. But I think most people would agree.
Of course, we all respect you Arjun. We serve you up very difficult moral dilemmas to fit into a Godly frameworks and you have never once stepped out of line, taken it personally, and reacted egotistically. And, of course, these are not addressed at you personally.
For many America, as an example, is the greatest terrorist, having replaced Britain and the primary colonial power. Terrorist both by its outright war, interfering with other nation's internal political, funding of terrorist states such as Israel and, lastly, via its energy and environmental policies (or lack thereof). Why should patriotism be limited, and sanctioned, to the game of nation states rather than other issues such as religion, the environment or even animal rights? (All areas where the United States of Terrorism accuses infinitely smaller aggressors).
Obviously patriotism is deeply body-conscious, as is nationalism. But either Lekhraj Kirpalani or Shiva seems awfully fond of it. Personally, I would have thought a truly "Spiritual Organization" would have been steered entirely the other direction, away from nationalistic tendencies, to teach oneness of all. Rather than be encouraged to milk it or sanction warring for it.
Really, honestly, what gives George Bush, say, more moral or spiritual authority than Bin Laden to condemn young men and women to death? Or the Palestinians less moral or spiritual authority than the American funded Zionists who are killing them at the ratio of 5 or 10 to 1? India over Pakistan?
Are BapDada just canny politicians that seem the most benefit for their organization by taking sides with top dogs, how ever much they stink, and not rocking the boat? The clever monkeys out to steal the butter from the fighting cats?
Yes, this is a very tough line of questioning. It is putting God the Dot on the spot. I would not expect a poignant answer in a public forum and so no need to ask it for me. I am not worthy of having questions answered as I am not follow all principles and meditation, and as such could never been expected to understand or accept his Shrimat.