Mama!

To discuss the BK and PBK versions of the factual Yagya history from the beginning.
Post Reply
User avatar
primal.logic
ex-BK
Posts: 73
Joined: 15 May 2006

Mama!

Post by primal.logic » 21 Dec 2007

I recently read the book written by Mama in 1939, provided by ex-l in the History section. It was very revealing but I thought I would bring it out into this space for those who don't go to that section - firstly, it was very articulate and well prepared and presented and struck me as being way beyond the abilities of a 20 year old girl in 1939, notably as it was presented in English. Dada Lehkraj probably had a lot to do with it given their relationship.

Keeping in mind this was written by Mama, in consultation with Lehkraj probably - some of the highlights were:
  • pg 38 (pg 56 in pdf file): "knowledge is given by Krishna..."

    pg 39 (pg 57 in pdf file): "Father Krishna says ..."

    pgs 54/55 (pg 54/55): a quote from a visitor "the young girls ... preach ... the lofty truths of the Gita and Upanishads".

    pg 94 (pg111 in pdf file): Mamas words "each one of us here is taught how he or she is God"
This is all classic Hinduism. The sentiments and the mood of the book is entirely Hindu without any sign of the fundamentalism or extreme expressions for which Brahma Baba was later noted, such as in the document sent to the Queen abusing the British Raj and damning them all to hell in Shivas name! (That document is kept at Oxford University and has been seen by at least one ex-BK I know).

There is no sign of the cult ideas that took over the BKs from ... whenever. No mention of Shiva, Brahma, cycles or anything.

Interestingly Mama (Om Radhe) talks about how Dada Lehkraj started conducting satsang in his house in 1932 , how it steadily grew to a following of about 500 people before Om Mandli was established in 1935/6. Still no mention of Shiva or the Cycle.

And the reaction to Om Mandli was the result simply of 3 women independently refusing their husbands sex. This was an issue for a lot of women in that community because husbands would be away for months and years at a time on business, with mistresses overseas, and the wives did not want to have sex with a man who was a husband in name only. This was type of conflict was not uncommon then. It was just that now a finger could be pointed.

Also Mama describes how the anti Om Mandli party was driven by miffed husbands - or rather one in particular - and ironically this conflict forced Lehkraj, by law, to have women only in the boarding schools that he ran. Thus it became all about Kumaris - there is no suggestion that "The Brahma Kumaris" was ever a plan, so much as a wierd play of history.

So this all begs the question - since Mama has made it clear, by default, that Shiva did not descend into the body of Brahma in 1936, and still hadn't by 1939, at what point did Dada actually go nuts and start writing on walls, thus revealing the knowledge of Shiva? We are told prior to 1936, but clearly that is a fabrication. So maybe the better question is: at what point did Dada actually just go nuts?

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: Ohhh Mama!

Post by fluffy bunny » 22 Dec 2007

primal.logic wrote:Also Mama describes how the anti Om Mandli party was driven by miffed husbands - or rather one in particular ...
Do you have any reference for the documentation held at Oxford University? I'd like to see if it does mention Shiva because none of the rest of the material I have seen up to 1949 does. I think you ask a good question about when exactly did Lekhraj Kirpalani go nuts ... all that we do know for sure is that the BKWSU has spun a web of deceit around themselves and has been lying to their followers about it all for years.

Do you mean one of Mukhi Mangaram's family? The family Lekhraj Kirpalani's daughter had married into, the leader of the community and not just Lekhraj Kirpalani's next door neighbour but the individual that sold Kirpalani the house?

Frankly, given that we have now establish how much falsehood and exaggeration has been published by the BKWSU, I am pretty sure that all that they have said and you have written out to be taken with a big pinch of salt. I'd gamble my soul that it is all hysterically exaggerated and self-serving myth ... like the way they say Janki Kripalani "looked after the sick". There is a page that mentions what the Mangharam's were really like, here.

I am absolutely sure that Radhe did not write it. He, or they, were using her as a front. Lekhraj Kirpalani struck me as being very slippery, stepping into the background to avoid the legal problems and pushing her up front. I think the finger points at either one of the brother (from memory Arjun named one in particular) or Lekhraj Kirpalani's advocate and legal advisor Hardayal Hardy (later a Chief Justice in India). The case is mentioned in his autobiography "Struggles and Sorrows: The Personal Testimony of a Chief Justice".

It is also written that Lekhraj Kirpalani married his 15 year old daughter off to a 50 year old man.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest