This post is in relation to this note:
” Just a few days before Avyakt 7 was saying there is no time, no space in Incorporeal world.
(I was saying that there is no time However the space is there)
And today Baba is also saying in this murli (Sakar murali 4th Dec 2012 ) “Souls would definitely reside in a space.”
Pl note. Not for proving the point but for correcting the error.”
The following is an excerpt from the Sakar Murli on December 4th, 2012.
“For instance, there is the sky. It is not a physical object. It is just space. It still has a name-sky. It is a very subtle element. OK, deities reside even beyond that. That too is a space. They are sitting beyond the sky. Beyond that is another sky. That too is a place for souls to sit. That sky is called the brahm element. There are the three elements: Corporeal, subtle and incorporeal. Souls would definitely reside in a space. Therefore, there are three skies. The play takes place in this sky and so light is needed. There is not a play in the incorporeal world. That is called the element of brahm. Souls reside there. That is the highest of all. There are three worlds, that is, three storeys of the world.”
In this paragraph we can infer that Baba is explaining about the Brahm element and the Subtle region to the children. “ There is the sky, and then another sky were deities live which is a subtle sky (subtle region.) Beyond that subtle sky, there is another “sky” (space) where souls “sit.” That is called the “Brahm” element.
Then Baba mentions that “souls will definitely reside in a space.” (Read, In a “sky.”)
In this explanation we can perceive that souls could reside in anyone of the 3 “skies” or spaces.
Baba is using comparisons existing in the corporeal, physical world to explain the subtle region and the Brahm element to the “children.” Baba is just using the word “space” to be interchangeable with “sky” to make his explanation.
Is the above explanation accurate in explaining that there is “space” in the soul world?
Not necessarily. If we go by the definition of “space,” in Wikipedia:
“Space is the boundless, three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction. Physical space is often conceived in three linear dimensions, although modern physicists usually consider it, with time, to be part of a boundless four-dimensionalcontinuum known as spacetime.”
Note that Baba is using the term “space” which is used in the physical world to explain something which is “non-physical.”
If there is “no time” can we have space as we know it? In other words can we put “a soul in top of another soul” or can we say that the “soul world is crowded with souls.” No, we cannot.
In that “realm” as well as the subtle world, there is no sense of space as we know it in the physical world.
That is why when we “see” a ghost. Is that ghost occupying a “space”? If so which of the “3 skies” is the ghost occupying? 🙂
That is why in a “different” view, we can see that those 3 separate “skies” or spaces can be interrelated and again its “space” is just a perception.
A soul “residing” in the middle of the forehead, is not really occupying “space,” for no one will be able to find it. So where is it? It could be in any of those 3 “spaces” according to our perception, but at the same time, in none of them… but is there. 🙂
“Space” only exists in the perception of physical objects, the physical world, according to the above definition from Wikipedia.
The issue, is in the subtle region, where there is no existence of time, but there is movement.
For instance, we “see” Brahma Baba in scene “1.” In scene “2,” Brahma Baba extends his arm to bless us.” From scene 1 to scene 2, we call that as “time” from the perspective of the physical world; however, from the avyakt perspective the succession of “scene 1” and “scene 2” is not time, but could be called “space,” for lack of a better name.
This is just to demonstrate the issues with language in interpreting labels from the physical perspective and at the same time not having enough labels to represent a spiritual reality, for language is made under the consciousness of the physical dimension.
That is the challenge when explaining spirituality.