Purity

Mainly DEDICATED to Ex-BKs.
A neutral forum for congenial discussions and reservations related to the Godly Knowledge between ALL parties.
User avatar
pilatus
non-BK
Posts: 112
Joined: 26 May 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Detachment = Purity?

Post by pilatus » 27 Jul 2007

Sorry andrey, I completely disagree with your emphasis.
andrey wrote:First we have to cut all relationships with the world and with everyone and then to connect with one. Otherwise one enters into tug of war.
What you're describing is the sannyasi path = withdrawal from the world, which is only appropriate for a small fraction of people.

For the rest of us (people living in the world), the ongoing cycle which we need to work at is
  • 1) loving connection with God
    2) loving transformation of ourselves
    3) (and through this) loving transformation of our relationships.
It caused me some confusion at first, but even the BK emphasize becoming "detached and loving"

Very best wishes

andrey
PBK
Posts: 1288
Joined: 13 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by andrey » 28 Jul 2007

It is only a matter of breaking away with the intellect, not physically.

Then it is said that the effort we have to do is only to become detached then we automatically become loving. There is no need to make separate effort to become loving. The more one becomes detached, the more one becomes loving, automatically.

di
Friends and family of
Posts: 137
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: Australia

Post by di » 28 Jul 2007

I am really sorry, this whole concept is one which I just don't understand no matter how hard I try and would very much appreciate if someone could explain it to me in a simple and logical manner.

How can a person be detached and loving? To a non-BK person, someone has to have some caring or concern in order to be loving. If one is detached, they do not care, they have no connection with another, so how can they become loving? Doesn't loving require one to give something of oneself? Then how can you be loving, especially unconditionally if one is not prepared to give anything?

I understand I only have an individual experience of this detachment and it was the most cold hearted, destructive, unloving and selfish interaction I have ever had with anyone in my life. And this was supposed to be from someone who loved me dearly. I honestly do not understand, no matter how hard I try.

I do know that I cannot judge the many by the one individual, but given that this person was fully following the rules and teachings and being personally guided by the organisation as well as other posts here describing the loving detachment that takes place and the knowing infliction of pain and anguish which is a direct result of said detachment. What is worse is that this distress that is inflicted on another innocent person is done knowingly and committed with support and full awareness and then put down to karma. I am just trying to make sense of this.

I also understand that according to the teachings that a Shudra such as myself does not have the knowledge in order to understand. I have to disagree in that us shudras do have intellect and analytical abilities which are not hampered by our different beliefs. We just don't have blind faith and question when it comes to this.

I would be grateful if someone could clarify this for me and may assist me in continuing to come to terms with my situation and the horrendous position I have been left to try to manage in. That is, of course if it can be explained, or is it just more BK speak and an attempt to get faithful followers to strive to attain something that is impossible to obtain. An analogy would possibly be saying to be a vegan you need to consume 3 meals of fish a week. I don't mean to offend anyone but that is the most descriptive comparison that I can think of.

In other words, both are incompatible, just as later as a person finds out that the more they become involved in BKs that a relationship and being a BK is incompatible, and BK org accepts all religions is not the truth either, but is revealed once a new convert reaches a certain stage. It makes me question (without having this explanation I am asking for ) if this detachment and loving state is just another claim of contradictions that the BK org is so well known for. That is how it appears to non-BKs anyway. Does this love a different definition to which the rest of us are unfamiliar? Is it restricted to a BK role of thinking only and to be directed with restrictions and rules to only other members of the org even though on the surface it is taught to be directed to all living creatures?

If this is the case and the word 'love' has its own special meaning then I think it is misleading to bandy it around the world. An understanding of 'love' and detachment in the world I know describes two totally contradictory words that cannot co-exist in a practical sense. It would appear that this 'loving state' is a lip service and not practiced in a practical manner.

To me this also ties in with the 'benefit' thread and who is actually benefiting. I think this is a major issue that needs clarification if the BK org is to gain any credibility with those who are not surrendered and have been on the receiving end of this loving detachment.

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 28 Jul 2007

It means be a selfish bastard, up your own arse but smile at everyone whilst you do it :lol: :lol:.

I think the only decent justification for such an ideal is to be loving without being over run with your own emotions. Say for instance if you're with a really sick relative. It doesn't help to be hysterically emotional ... you could say controlling yourself for their benefit is being loving and detached ... but this is quite different to how the BKs intend it to be understood.

User avatar
joel
ex-BK
Posts: 440
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I was an active BK for 12 years. That was long ago. Now I am just a person.

Post by joel » 28 Jul 2007

andrey wrote:It is only a matter of braking away with the intellect, not physically.

Then it is said that the effort we have to do is only to become detached then we automatically become loving. There is no need to make separate effort to become loving. The more one becomes detached, then he becomes loving automatically.
That theory does not work for me. Loving behavior for me develops out of feeling a connection to a person, taking the risk to reach out. To be detached is to be safe and to be alone. To stay inside myself is equivalent to running away.

User avatar
alladin
Friends and family of
Posts: 718
Joined: 27 Feb 2007

phoney

Post by alladin » 28 Jul 2007

Hi, Di, as usual your letter deserves more time than I have now for a reply, but just 2 things to start with, quoting u:
"Then how can you be loving, especially unconditionally if one is not prepared to give anything? " what u said reflects the truth, once again shows how a shortcoming or dysfunction gets disguised and magically transformed into holiness by the BKs.

"It would appear that this 'loving state' is a lip service and not practiced in a practical manner. " After some time, whoever has come in contact with Raja Yoga centers, can see what it's all about, part of it is chatting up , spoiling and giving gifts to VIPS.

User avatar
tinydot
ex-BK
Posts: 304
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Loving and detached versus Loving and attached

Post by tinydot » 28 Jul 2007

Loving and detached versus Loving and connected (attached)

IMHO, there is no right or wrong. There are only transitional choices we make in our lifetime depending on circumtances. A person who has been betrayed or being betrayed by a loved one may develop the "loving and detached" attitude to protect himself and recover from the hurt feeling he has sufferred or has been suffering. This he chose for moment in time until he choose to be ready again, commit himself and take risk to get connected to a loved one.

If the world is perfect, I would choose to be loving and attached forever (ideal choice for me), however we know it is not, and therefore we apply the loving and detached attitude once in a while. Loving and being attached is developed as we ascertain that the risk of our dammage is small. What if our loved one whom we have attachment to, died of an accident, something beyond our control? I think the love and attachment we have developed is not wasted because that attitude we have was the foundation of the relationship in the first place. It is perfectly fine to cry for the time being until we recover and move on. We learned several lessons in life and we become better in managing our emotions. Balance is also something to consider in my opinion.

It is no wonder why a lot of BKs have the "loving and detached" attitude because they had gone through a lot of s***. But to preach that this is a BETTER attitude than being loving and attached is something I don't completely agree. It all depends on situations. To be loving and attached physically, emotionally and intellectually is very beautiful. They shouldn't give a medicine to a healthy relationship in my opinion. The medicine should stay in the kit for further use in the future.

User avatar
alladin
Friends and family of
Posts: 718
Joined: 27 Feb 2007

icebergs

Post by alladin » 28 Jul 2007

I have a friend who has a good heart and is very pragmatic. Recently she told me that she and her companion enjoy having sometime totally for themselves and one of the reason for not wanting to become too attached or dependent on the other person, is that, in fact, one may oultlive the other and loosing a partner can be devastating experience of lonelyness!
In my experience, I feel that it is a matter of quantity and proportions: a pinch of detachment can save our life and sanity, more than that can transform a relationship into some Artic sea where only icebergs are in sight!!

User avatar
joel
ex-BK
Posts: 440
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I was an active BK for 12 years. That was long ago. Now I am just a person.

Re: icebergs

Post by joel » 28 Jul 2007

alladin wrote:In my experience, I feel that it is a matter of quantity and proportions: a pinch of detachment can save our life and sanity, more than that can transform a relationship into some Artic sea where only icebergs are in sight!!
I've had to leave relationships where the other person leaves no distance or privacy, even while experiencing a miraculous passionate closeness that I still hunger for.

di
Friends and family of
Posts: 137
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: Australia

Post by di » 29 Jul 2007

Thank you all for your answers. Very caring, thank you. Please correct me if I am wrong but is not the teaching to become detached from all others and only love God? To me (and once again I am trying to clarify this) to give all of oneself to another and not maintain one's own individuality is an unhealthy state. This is what I am reading into your replies. A good balanced perspective. A person needs to have some detachment at times in order to grow as a unique individual and not fall into the trap of co-dependency, so I whole heartedly agree.

What I am addressing is the extremist view of total detachment from all others in all aspects in order to become all loving. What you good people have described is not this total detachment where you can turn you back on another human being. The end aim of obtaining Shrimat not justifying any means. You still are carrying some responsibility in your actions to another human from what you describe. A certain amount of connection or attachment.

The BK doctrine states that one must strive to obtain the amount of purity in order to be in the final numbers. To strive to become sannyasis status. I want to know if the teaching is to totally detached from all humanity and any individual(s) in it, how is it possible to then be loving? It can only be a very conditional loving in that it must adhere to the rigid guidelines provided and can be only 'felt' or acted on as long as it fits within the constraints.

This conditional 'love' to me is not love but a superficial service which is dependant on whether it will fit within the guidelines allowed and is great PR for the org depicting this all loving, world humanity, caring, Godly system which we know is not fully the case at all. If the heads of the BK can be so well known for their volatile tempers, that shows detachment but certainly not loving and they have been at it for 70 years.

Of course you can be in a situation where you can feel very loving towards someone but have to remove yourself because it is unhealthy for you. Fact is you are still attached and have feelings for the other person. The person as I knew and loved has died and become something else - very cold- unless in a superficial fashion, then he can be all sweet and nicey nicey. I love the person he was, the person he is now I don't like, mainly the cold and calculating aspects. I have to come to terms with who he is now, and detach from him. Doesn't mean I don't care about what happens to him, but I know longer can afford to love him, for my own well being.

Yes, I care about him as another human being and don't really want anyone to suffer but as far as loving him (and i am not just talking about a romantic love) it would be suicide to continue to have any real feelings for him. I have to go throughout the grieving process to do this. To put myself in a position of truly loving this person, to give of myself would be madness. I have to detach to stop loving him. You understand what i am saying? It is all conditional. What you have described is attachment with conditions and well balanced normal interactions with others not this totally detachment and unconditional love. There is a fine line I admit, but to me what it is saying is

We (the BK org) have the best excuses in the world to be totally self fulfilling aka selfish, do what ever we want to obtain the end goals dictated to us and revised and rewritten as we see fitting, and if it is applicable do some nice things along the way, but if it comes to the crunch steam roll and destroy everything that stands in the path but tell the world what a wonderful all encompassing loving association we are.

Please remember I am not talking about an individual's true sacrifice of themselves for this organisation with the well intentioned idea of giving themselves for the benefit and salvation of mankind. I am talking about the basis of the organisation and the manipulation of words and people.

This is not love but certainly is detachment without responsibility.

User avatar
alladin
Friends and family of
Posts: 718
Joined: 27 Feb 2007

extremism

Post by alladin » 29 Jul 2007

Just a tiny comment on a huge topic: Di, u mentioned extremism. The BKs adore that, it's their religion, it is the way to reach perfection

User avatar
abrahma kumar
Friends and family of
Posts: 1133
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Contact:

No Andrey! It is loving detachment - if anything at all.

Post by abrahma kumar » 29 Jul 2007

andrey wrote:It is only a matter of breaking away with the intellect, not physically. Then it is said that the effort we have to do is only to become detached then we automatically become loving. There is no need to make separate effort to become loving. The more one becomes detached, the more one becomes loving, automatically.
Ah, Andrey, what a teacher you are. Your post is very informative along lines i have been churning recently. Namely that what the BKs preach and the emotional consequence of those teachings are in opposition to each other. But we make a virtue of that.

Our deep study of the Intellect, Mind, Sanskars etc turns us not only into walking BK text books but it also happens that after a while our thoughts, words and actions reveal that we have dis-associated from reality. Di's final sentence speaks volumes about a reality that I am now starting to explore.

My question is, how do the BK teachings accomplish this? How can a human being talk about all we need to do is become perfectly detached and we will be perfectly loving? Does it make sense? HAve i finally lost my Godly Student status and so i am no longer even able to see the elevated nature of those teachings? How many other BKs pursue perfection this way?

Is it the order of the words that imprints on us psychologically, inspite of all the sweet, syrupy talk that we use to explain our knowledge in universally inclusive terms? Is it like some form of subliminal programming? Am i mad? Does this make any sense?

malachiel
Not sure
Posts: 24
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by malachiel » 29 Jul 2007

di wrote: This is not love but certainly is detachment without responsibility.
That's also called giving up, or abandoning. I would even say betrayal, to a certain extent.

Back in the days, we received a 7 day class based on Eckhart Tolle's Power of Now book. What it basically said was that we have to deal with things as they are, not as they should be. I believe that is also the problem with BK life: there's a lot of arguing about how things should be, said or done, but not much actions. There is huge denial issue, as if problems were just going to disappear when you turn your back on them. That problem is also linked with the "detachment vs love" issue, consequently the perception of purity.

Purity, then, would have to be responsible for the relationships that we hold, in a manner that is respectful of the self, like andrey depicted it above. I seriously cannot believe that you have more chances of attaining purity by dropping all you've ever known to go live with a bunch total strangers, and feel perfectly well and comfortable knowing your loved ones will grieve. That's not the way I want to be "loving and detached".

Di, I am sorry for what you are going through. I would like to tell you this: "The mind doesn't reign over the heart. You cannot always chose the people you love. But you can chose the way you love them and they don't have to know about it." I hope this can bring some comfort to you.
Is it the order of the words that imprints on us psychologically, in spite of all the sweet, syrupy talk that we use to explain our knowledge in universally inclusive terms? Is it like some form of subliminal programming? Am I mad? Does this make any sense?
You are far from being mad, Abrahma Kumar. It sounds a lot like a doctor who studies anatomy, but forgets that he's treating a human being. Loads of knowledge, but not much humanity. No, becoming pure has nothing to do with becoming a "Murli repeating machine" or with the constant refusal of acknowledging pain as being real. That is particularly frustrating.

User avatar
howiemac
ex-BK
Posts: 146
Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BKWSU
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Brahmin soul, formerly with BKWSU, now independent
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by howiemac » 04 Aug 2007

di wrote:Please correct me if I am wrong but is not the teaching to become detached from all others and only love God?
This is accurate - they say "love one Baba and no other".

IMHO, this is a misguided and damaging approach. The spiritual approach (true love) is to love every being unconditionally, as on the spiritual level we are all one - to love others is to love yourself. Even the BKs say we should all become divine like God, and they say that God loves every one unconditionally. So it is illogical (and crushingly impossible) to attempt to love only God and at the same time to attempt to become like God!

It is far better to focus on loving ourselves and our fellow beings (and forget about "God" if that "God" requires any other approach).

The spiritual approach is to be "loving and detached" - there is no conflict in this, as the detachment referred to is detachment from bodily perspectives like fear, insecurity, and selfish emotion - and the love is pure spiritual love which is all about giving, and includes compassion and generosity towards all other souls.

However the prevalent BK practice is to become cold, loveless, and physically detached from others, while remaining emotionally attached to Brahma Baba, the Dadis, the BK organisation, the BK properties, and the BK culture. This is NOT in any way spiritual and it IS very damaging. They crush and destroy their own psyches, and also hurt those who are/were close to them, and all for no benefit ...

andrey
PBK
Posts: 1288
Joined: 13 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by andrey » 04 Aug 2007

Detached means detached from the consciousness of the body, that I’m the body, I am so-and-so, detached from the relatives of the body that these are mother of the body, Father of the body, friends, relatives, objects of the body, that this is my house, my car etc., detached from all of these and having the awareness that whatever I have, body , mind, wealth, relatives connections, everything belongs to ShivBaba.

There is soul conscious love that is not only to the relatives of the body, but a feeling that the whole world is our family. Bodily love is love for ones own body, bodies of others and the pleasures that come out of the body. Since we all have bodies we have thoughts about the body, so our love is always selfish to some extend.

We believe there is only one source of selfless love – the soul who is the supreme Father and never has his own body. He is detached soul. Attachment comes when the soul is in the body, but no matter this soul can be in the body it is still detached. It means he does not have partiality or familiarity with some souls. Super sensual love. Loving means in unlimited way, unconditionally. Not loving today and hateful tomorrow, or loving because and non loving because, because can love depend on mood or external things. It comes out of certain approach. So it is said that he is an ocean of love and will remain like this till the end.

Detachment means to consider oneself a soul and develop brotherly love with others and there is no need to hurt people in this. We are thought to not hurt people, but also not to be hurt by people. It is only the bodyconciousness or some expectation that result in sorrow for us. We are indeed being transformed in happy idiots that think that whatever happens is good, whatever happened is also good and whatever will happen will be even better.

Its different to what we are used, a new different world where there will not be any kind of sorrow and any kind of violence. It hard to belive now, but we have to bring it into practical.

We don’t have concern because we believe in the theory of the cycle that scenes change and now we know that past will become present again. Whatever we were we’ll become once again the same. In this drama we have relationships with certain souls they come and go. Detached means to develop an attitude of belonging to each soul, not just to few, and not to cut relationships with some. We like to cut, if we don’t like someone and like him to change or disappear. We believe this is a perfect play and everyone has his own part and we belong eternally to everyone end everyone belongs to us. Nothing can be added or taken away from this play. We can only change ourselves, our attitude. We don’t have the power or right to control others, even through our expectations from them, because we desire benefit, we believe we will get whatever we like to have only from one supreme Father and no one else. Only from one source and we believe benefit for others also is with him and not with us.

It is also detached to think about the self and not to look at others. We often tend to look at others to find faults or compare with them. To be introspective, introverted is not bad. Maybe there is no need to love each and every soul individually. Maybe this love is not possible, but when we face others we can approach them with equal vision, can we have higher vision for some and lower for some. Do we have the right to judge this way. But we can love only one, single soul, the seed in which the whole world is contained. It is said that there is no need to water each and every leaf (soul) separately. If we give the water of love to the seed then it reaches all the leaves through the tree.

Detached is also to be detached from the whole world means to know, accept and live as if this world is going to end, that this can be my final moment, that a new world is arriving.

Detached is also not to chase temporary benefit like name and fame and success and having the consciousness that success is my birthright it will come to me, it will chase me like a shadow, it is not that I will chase it. Victory is my birthright it is a garland around my neck. That whatever is received easily is like milk, whatever we receive through asking is like water and whatever we grab is like blood. Also not walking after others.

It is also to sit in one position and to not like to go down. To rest a little bit in the mind. To experience silence.

It is also to be independent and uninfluenced, to maintain self respect.

It means the stage of the mind and intellect we are in whilst we live in the world. Detached mind and intellect. Incorporeal stage, like the stage one can see on the face of the pictures of Jesus, or Buddha, that it is as if they are not here in this world with the mind and intellect, as if they are here only physically as if they are from another world, somewhere away, very far away above the clouds and the sky and the moon and the sun and the stars. As if they don’t belong here as if they are just guests here for a little time, as if they have come only to give something and not to take anything, as if they don’t have any worldly desires.

Regarding the purity of food, that some say why don’t you eat from whatever I have cooked am I dirty, then we believe we should all eat from one and the same pot. If we believe that whatever we have food etc belongs to ShivBaba then this food becomes pure. Since ShivBaba is just a soul then he is only concerned to change our mind, he will not take our food. We sacrifice everything to him so that we become free from thinking about these, not because he needs these. We just hand our burdens to him since he cannot be burdened it is not a problem for him. It is we who become burdened with everything.

Detached is also to be tired and to know why, to know that the soul has passed through many hurdles and has lost its power and now has to go back home and now it is a time for rest

It is also detached to make attempt to make other equal to yourself, to have faith more in the power of the mind, that everything can be achieved with the power of thoughts, more than through words and actions..

Detached is also to know that no one belongs to me and I don’t belong to anyone except I belong to one and he belongs to me. no one else.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests