How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Mainly DEDICATED to Ex-BKs.
A neutral forum for congenial discussions and reservations related to the Godly Knowledge between ALL parties.
sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by sita » 06 Oct 2011

Does anyone really believe they, or Lekhraj Kirpalani, did not think, "what are we going to do?" ... and then just decide they had to go out into India and take over the business of religion from local gurus starting with all the displaced Sindhis (e.g. later going to Hong Kong, London etc)? ... Knowing that they could tap into the Sindhi wealth at least? ... then Punjabi, then Gujerati? Does anyone really believe it was "divine" rather than just adopting the only potential survival model India offered them?
Indeed it must be so that they have thought that destruction will happen sooner, but later by the force of circumstances they had to find way to survive, but you cannot say that this has been the initial plan, that many make this critics that it is meant for money. They have sincerely believed that world will end and there will be no need for work or money. It has also been harder, because they liked to survive as a group and not one by one, they liked to preserve what has been created and you cannot deny something has been created. Otherwise if everyone would just walk away, then everything goes in vain.

Although the predictions may have not come to happen as they were being thought to happen still, or you may not be happy with all the ideas presented there still, besides it there is somethiing about the day-to-day life in the followers something in the relationship between them that makes sense. Many people are just attracted by the atmosphere and the sweetness of people etc and not the knowlegde. Different people need different things, but it also depends what are the ideas. If you are able to invent such an idea and market it in such a way so that you can earn your livelyhood through this, it means it has some quality. Of course we simpathise to the hard workers and poor, but there are such people who give lectures and take money and are rich, but here lectures are not given for money.

About whatever is happening between fluffy and sachkhand i would say Fluffy bunny is often overly cynical and he knows it. To me also is sometimes irritating that it is as if he does it on purpose, deliberately just to shock people and to irritate them. But sachkhand is taking advantage to belittle Roy Bhai and pbkindiana as ideological opponents by making dramatizations. We have seen he can sometimes use a swet voice and now we see he may sometimes also play offended.

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: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by fluffy bunny » 06 Oct 2011

sita wrote:later by the force of circumstances they had to find way to survive, but you cannot say that this has been the initial plan
Yes, I agree. It was not the initial plan. The question I am asking myself is, "was it a conscious plan when it came about?" Did Lekhraj Kirpalani stop and think, "I am going to have to send girls out and bring money back in or we will all starve and die?". As a religious donor in his previous life, he knew other businessmen would donate too.

My greatest disappointment is that the Brahma Kumaris are not honest about the reinvention period of their history, because it is the most interesting one. We know the numbers have dropped considerably, there were not 300 people in Madhuban, and we know that Lekhraj Kirpalani's money alone did not support them. More came in from other places.

I think of cynicism as a negative thing whereas I think of what I do as being the acid of truth burning away everything that is false. It things are true, they will not be hurt by it, survive and be revealed.

There are skeptic or rational Indian but I think the general tendency in India is to accept or be afraid of religious or superstitious nonsense, out of fear of the social impact if one does not. The guru is king.
Roy wrote:Narration of incomprehensible knowledge, doesn't really cut it as being charity in todays world! :D
Thank you. You are correct. I think this topic, and the one on 'Traditional view of Bramans by Hindus' are two of the most interesting and relevant topics to explore the context of Gyan in today's world. Essential, how Indians in general see and experience The Knowledge and how Westerners see and experience The Knowledge.

I cannot comment on the AIVV, I just see it as a reformist movement within Brahma Kumarism, an attempt to take Brahma Kumarism back to its roots and resolve all the philosophical inconsistencies. The basic AIVV theory seems to be, "if this is all divine and true and from God, then it must make sense somehow and we should follow it".

The Brahma Kumaris really don't care about that. Their basic theory seems to be, "if it does not make obvious sense, cut it out, remove it and hide it away but keep the business running", and that counts for people as well as theory.

For me, at some point, the Brahma Kumaris just saw the financial opportunity of putting themselves in the place of the local gurus or brahman as the top of the social pyramid, and the benefit in doing so.

They had no money. What else could they do? Starvation is a pretty strong motivator. Becoming another Bhakti religion and living off others was just the easy way out ... especially for Sindhi targeting the Sindhi market. Their Sindhiness was and still is one of their USPs ... unique selling points, the other one is that they are women. The hard way to survive would have been to start a business or get whatever job they could, and earned their own money just like the rest of us.

They, or Lekhraj Kirpalani, just took the easy way out and RE-INVENTED their ridiculous and self-indulgent sitting around doing nothing waiting for Destruction in order to become deities as a religion. Even to the point of inventing an alternative God story. Introducing Shiva around 1950.

Ever since then, the BKs are become increasingly "religious" or Bhakti-like in India and increasingly New Agey or Business Consultant-like in the West except for in non-Indian Hindu communities where they play out the Hinduism replacement model and become the local temple for people that want to be holy. That is partly why they put on all the Hindu festivals.

In India, within Hindu communities, there is an established business model which is approximately, "We tell everyone we are God inspired or God empowered, organise a few festivals, tell a few stories, and listen to people's problems ... and they give us money". Easy, especially if you include the idea of karma, "karma cleaning or removing" ... and borrow from Christianity the idea of the "End of the World".

Most people are consumers of religion and if you provide a place to be religious, a form of religiousness, they will come and believe. They have been programmed to believe and be seen to believe for 100s of years. It does not really matter what, or even if it works, they will come anyway, and "religion" plays a valued social role of bringing people together etc. Some stay for a short time, a few stay for ever.

In India, the mass market 'buys' simple messages and religious pomp and it seems to be the Brahma Kumaris are moving more and more towards providing it, and eating into the religious market competing against traditional gurus, pandits etc. People buy mega-programmes with lots of flowers, big thrones, big pictures etc as being proof of religious, so the BK provide it.

The Knowledge does not make sense to Westerners. Our general education in science and world history goes against it. I think in the beginning, most Westerners were attracted to the Knowledge because of its Indian-ness just as they might have been attracted to any Hindu sect. Many were attracted to the "exotic" nature and the feeling of being part of a Hindu community, which was preferable to Western society. Now they are attracted by the nice buildings and the New Agey front. The Brahma Kumaris have been washing off the Hindu-ness as puts of more Westerners than it attracts and it is seen a primitive, unstylish and ignorant.

Again it is all down to marketing and being "clever business people" to quote the Murli.

After the Knowledge fails for them, some Westerners try and justify the Knowledge as a huge "Zen Koan", a puzzle that cannot be worked out but it does not matter ... that is the point of it. To stop the mind or ego grasping.

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by sita » 06 Oct 2011

The Brahma Kumaris really don't care about that. Their basic theory seems to be, "if it does not make obvious sense, cut it out, remove it and hide it away but keep the business running", and that counts for people as well as theory.
It must be because whilst knowledge is motivator for some, practical matters are motivation for others. One is not good and other is not bad. If the practical side is not there, there is no use of knowledge. What is the use if you are knowledgeful if you are not happy due to this, if there is no benefit, if there is not something going on with it, about it, from it. And people just liked to live like this, they were happy with it. Living in knowlegde is practical knowledge itself also, in comparison to simple theory, that's why some see it just enough to lead a virtuous life without thinking too much and they are often even more happy people than many others in general. This is being observed in religion here and there, but it is not all bad. Whatever you may say about the knowledge, but you may find that in terms of virtuosity they are playing a very good part comparing to any other religious or spiritual movement of the world. I can understand that your critics are for internal use for the BKs, but for any outsider the image of negativity hipocrisy etc. is not realistic, because it is much better than what we see every day every where. People are really good there in one or another way. And finally there must be some balance between theory and pracice. Ithink this is your critics, because going into practice naively, without thinking, just following you are also bound to go down. One has to use common sense to prevent and create the circumstances.

I see you are very much interested in the budget part of in and out of money, but maybe it also exagerated the clever image you try to depict. i think it is more that Brahma Baba was indeed naive and innocent like a baby and some people arround him with trade gift had turn it into business. Maybe also Brahma Baba has had some trade talent, but i think he has been better in the pomp, show and splendor, making an image and impresiion etc. and he has been less interested in money matters and being rich, but having influence, position, being loved, respected etc. To be rich is also some mentality. There is difference between people who are rich and it shuits them well, they are generous and impressive and there are those other type, that you say that are hidden, clever and make money and think of money and count them day and nigh. and are thrifty. I think Brahma Baba has been from the first type, whilst there is the possibility that there are also other types in the BK, not everyone follows Brahma Baba.

People like Brahma baba that are pure and sincere are often misused and misguded by others. We don't know how far it is his responsibility in the whole running of the Yagya and how far is influence of others even to him. In the Murli it used to be said that to marry is to destroy oneself, but whilst people used to come to him, asking him about marrige, looking at their unhappy faces his heart used to melt and give permissions. Brahma baba is a person to follow in the practical, virtuous life but not in the terms of strictnest of knowledge, rules, regulations and not in the terms of intellectual capacity, information, interpretation etc.

User avatar
Roy
Posts: 1318
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Affinity to the BKWSU: questioning BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I have been associated with Raj Yoga since 1985, and have only quite recently come to learn of the PBKs and this forum, which i find a great place to get deeper insights into all things Gyani, and hear input from many sides. I find this most healthy, stimulating, and informative, and hope this continues for some time to come.
Location: UK

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Roy » 06 Oct 2011

Roy wrote:I see your point of view. No overtly charitable acts can be seen to be taking place in Gyan, both in the early days of Brahma Baba, or now with Baba Dixit. Narration of incomprehensible knowledge, doesn't really cut it as being charity in todays world! :D
Although i see your point fluffy Bhai, i don't necessarily agree with it; i was being a little ironic here; this is not my viewpoint on the matter! I was simply acknowledging how it may be perceived, by those who don't understand what this whole movement is about. I agree there is a place for the type of charity you speak of, and i think it says much about you as a person that you wish to see these problems addressed; but this simply is not what the Brahma Kumaris movement is all about. One more charitable organisation, that is the same as any other charitable organisation, is not going to bring any real change in this world. The BK movement is supposed to be radical, and it is, totally radical; this is why most don't get it. But as you are stating time and time again, the way the BKs have conducted themselves, especially since Brahma Baba's death, has brought the organisation into disrepute for the wrong reasons. It's one thing to not be liked or understood because your beliefs are so "out-there"; but is entirely another thing when it can be seen that you have messed with the historical facts, so that you can continue to appeal to the public, and actually make a good living out of a new, pc, glossy but bland repackaging, of the original movement. It's no wonder people like yourself are so angry about all of this, and want to expose the people behind it, for the frauds they are.

Roy

satyaprakash
Posts: 264
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Friends or Family of
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: trying to know more

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by satyaprakash » 07 Oct 2011

fluffy bunny wrote: We expect our saints to help the poor, start up schools, heal people, write great literary works etc.
This is a Christian view. Hindus say helping others in every way is good. Hinduism does not expect every religious person to do social service. There are many great saints like Sri.Ramakrishna Paramahansa, Raman Maharishi, Meera Bai etc who never did any social service.
BKs/PBK also never do social service! Anyhow they do not call themselves as Hindus and can be excluded from this point.
Satya.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Sach_Khand » 07 Oct 2011

Roy wrote: Fluffy Bhai, may have no belief in either the BK teachings or the Advanced Knowledge, but he brings with him a lot of experience and knowledge, that reveals truths about the impure practices and lies, that have taken place in the name of the BKWSU. Roy
Great!
Roy wrote: fluffy Bhai has no faith in this, so will continue to seek to play his own part in revealing the truth. I have no problem with this, because as a seeker of truth, i have to be prepared to face any hard facts that emerge from this process, and relish all these things being shown in blazing technicolour. Roy
Will your attitude be the same when fluffy tries to reveal the truth behind the accusations of rape by some about Virendra Dev Dixit. Will you and other PBKs here be the same if you are asked about the so called Shankar part being played by Virendra Dev Dixit. Do you have the guts to wite your true views and opinions.

I am not against criticising BKs or BKWSU for the wrongs they do. But tarnishing it's image totally as if it ha no good in it is what I am opposing. Will their be AIVV without BK Murlis and AVs? You can criticise any BK even personally for the wrongs they do. But making fun of someone in a vulgar way is not a respectable manner. Writing about undergarments. And fluffy has purposely written a long post once again about the undergarments. That just shows his mentality. If you too want to join him and laugh with him regarding this issue then it is upto you. I do not agree with such posts.

Possibly admin of this forum is changed or is made to keep silent. But I can oppose your ways.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Sach_Khand » 07 Oct 2011

pbkindiana wrote: Facts in any issue is acceptable. It is heart-rending to give every single cent that one has saved to the BK Yagya and the BKs used to buy expensive clothings just for the Dadis on BapDada's season. Is it justified? Did ever Shiva mention in any SM to do that?
You want ShivBaba to mention about the undergarments of his Chariot and what it's cost should be? Ridiculous.
pbkindiana wrote: Practise before you preach to others. Your accusation of Baba Dixit with rape or sexual assault devoid of any documentation itself contradicts with the above statement of yours.
You have written a plain lie. Your accusation is totally wrong. Just quote me where I have accused atleast once. I have never accuse Virendra Dev Dixit with rape or sexual assault. I have only questioned about the so called Shankar part by Virendra Dev Dixit. And also questioned whether Virendra Dev Dixit is the real Father Father of the child of Kamala Devi and her leaving the pbk yagnya and her marriage is is just a coverup for that. This simple question about the very important personality of AIVV made the so called seekers of truth here to become red hot and burning.
pbkindiana wrote: My sisiter, a PBK told me that when a new PBK Sister surrenders in AIVV, then she is given 5 sarees + 5 saree blouses + 5 petticoats + 5 undergarments and they have to use these clothes till it is torn. 5 clothings are given, as during the summer, they are able to change twice during the hot weather. The Sisters keep these 5 pairs of clothings for several years.
indie.
Has ShivBaba told Virendra Dev Dixit to eat special food like dry fruits while his children (followers) are given just simple Indian food. I have seen how he is fed dry fruits by his female followers. Has ShivBaba told Virendra Dev Dixit to take service from his female followers, but in front of me a female follower called him and he went behind her. What kind of service would he get from a female follower? I cannot say. I do not even have any problem myself. I know that it is the love of his followers for Virendra Dev Dixit. But people like fluffy have problem.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Sach_Khand » 07 Oct 2011

fluffy bunny wrote: You see Sachkand, that is why although I may not accept the AIVV teachings myself, I respect the PBKs for trying to follow what the teachings say sincerely, whereas on the whole, the BKs seem to spend all their time manipulating them, going against them and making excuse why it is OK.
You can take any side as and how it suits you. Your intentins are clear. Just attack BKs for whatever wrongs they they do. But it is not for any good but just to tarnish their image. You can continue with your job. It is good to have someone like you for any institution that without any payment, totally free.

Roy enjoys and laughs reading your silly criticisma like that of undergarments. And I foolishly tried to advice you. That was my fault. But it was because I felt that it is doing you harm rather than any good for your spiritual development and devlopment of your personality in general. Now it is upto you to chose your way.

fluffy bunny wrote: Yes, I remember you always attacking the PBKs. The conflict you bring was a big part of the reason why the forums had to split.
When you question something it is for bringing out the truth. But when I question about PBKs, it is attacking! I have right to question because I am a student of BK knowledge which even the PBKs follow. But you have n o right because you have no faith or interest in understanding BK knowledge.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Sach_Khand » 07 Oct 2011

sita wrote: About whatever is happening between fluffy and sachkhand i would say Fluffy bunny is often overly cynical and he knows it. To me also is sometimes irritating that it is as if he does it on purpose, deliberately just to shock people and to irritate them. But sachkhand is taking advantage to belittle Roy Bhai and pbkindiana as ideological opponents by making dramatizations. We have seen he can sometimes use a swet voice and now we see he may sometimes also play offended.
Your conclusion is totally wrong. I have not written against roy or Indiana. But they have written against me and taken side of fluffy just because I do not follow AIVV knowledge. Think before accusing.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

User avatar
Roy
Posts: 1318
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Affinity to the BKWSU: questioning BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I have been associated with Raj Yoga since 1985, and have only quite recently come to learn of the PBKs and this forum, which i find a great place to get deeper insights into all things Gyani, and hear input from many sides. I find this most healthy, stimulating, and informative, and hope this continues for some time to come.
Location: UK

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Roy » 07 Oct 2011

Just for the record, i have no problem with the BKs in general; it is the dishonest practices of the BK leadership that i oppose.

“Whatever good qualities someone has, he can donate to others and make someone equal to himself. This is why the Father(Shiv) keeps telling the children – Children, maintain potamail of your good qualities. Do I have any vice? Which divine virtue do I lack? Check your potamail every night. The issue of the worldly people is completely different. Now you are not human beings, are you? You are (true)Brahmins(PBKs). Although all the human beings are human beings. But there is a difference between the virtues and activity of each one. Even in the kingdom of Maya(BK world of Ravanraj; especially since 1969) some human beings(BKs) are very virtuous(their dharna is very good), but they do not know the Father(in his permanent form of Shankar-Ram, residing in Kampil). They are very religious minded, soft hearted. There is a variety of good qualities in human beings(BKs).” [Mu 17.06.09]

N.B. The sections in brackets, are interpretations based on Advance Knowledge.

Roy

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: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by fluffy bunny » 07 Oct 2011

Sach_Khand wrote: But they have written against me and taken side of fluffy just because I do not follow AIVV knowledge. Think before accusing
No, it is because you have a tendency to always go 'off topic' and write long rants. You go beyond "not following AIVV" to being actively anti- it.

Following on from the topic, 'Traditional view of Bramans by Hindus' and relating to Westerners see India and Indians, one thing for sure, few Westerners have any idea at all about the complexity of the caste and jati system and, as Indians, it is strange that the BKs don't explain about it rather than just saying their are four. But if most of them are caste born shudras, I can understand why they don't.

As usual, it was the British in 1901, for the sake of the Decennial Census, who tried to fitted all the jatis into the other varna categories, messing things up and ignoring that many Jatis often straddle Varnas, based on a number of factors. I think the BKs also use the word and portray "Shudras" wrongly. It really is synonymous with the lowest, most impure more like untouchables.
sita wrote:People in the BK or PBK ... They don't even call themselves as Brahmins, but rather sons or daughters or Brahma (Brahma Kumars or Kumaris).
Is this true? In India, do BKs and PBKs call themselves Brahma Kumars or Kumaris rather than Brahmins.

In the West, they tend to use the acronym BKs, or "Brahmins" and think they are. It is wrong that they use the same word and must seem very funny to real Brahmins. As if the BKs are deluded.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: How Indians see Westerners, & Westerners see India & Indians

Post by Sach_Khand » 10 Oct 2011

Sach_Khand wrote: But they have written against me and taken side of fluffy just because I do not follow AIVV knowledge. Think before accusing
fluffy bunny wrote:No, it is because you have a tendency to always go 'off topic' and write long rants. You go beyond "not following AIVV" to being actively anti- it.
It is for Roy and Indiana to answer and not you. Do not try to speak on behalf of them. Their silence has given the answer.
fluffy bunny wrote:Following on from the topic, 'Traditional view of Bramans by Hindus' and relating to Westerners see India and Indians, one thing for sure, few Westerners have any idea at all about the complexity of the caste and jati system and, as Indians, it is strange that the BKs don't explain about it rather than just saying their are four. But if most of them are caste born shudras, I can understand why they don't.

As usual, it was the British in 1901, for the sake of the Decennial Census, who tried to fitted all the jatis into the other varna categories, messing things up and ignoring that many Jatis often straddle Varnas, based on a number of factors. I think the BKs also use the word and portray "Shudras" wrongly. It really is synonymous with the lowest, most impure more like untouchables.
I am not here to discuss jatis and castes in Indian society. IMO it is better if you find some other forum for this. If Roy and Indiana are intrested in discussing these topics with you then they are free to discuss it. My only request would be that another group should be created for such discussions.

And I feel that this post of yours is itself "off topic" for this forum and is nothing but long rant.
Bye.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests