When we awaken into the consciousness of oneness, we could understand how the “I” came into being. Then, we can understand how important it becomes to observe emotions which arise as “creations” of the “I.”
Shall we say that the “I” is an illusion?
Let us not be “black or white.” The “I” is a “reality” for many. It is paradoxical.
The “I” exists but it doesn’t. It all depends on the location of our consciousness, which is not dependent on the “I” to change, but it will change by itself, for it is change itself.
However, it is in this consciousness of being an “I,” how the search for safety and comfort appear.
The world and Nature seem like a hostile place for the “I” to exist. The “I” has to fight, conquer, show, teach, and convince… obviously, many things to “do.”
Nevertheless, the law of the “stronger” appears. It is an “I” against another “I.”
Wouldn’t it be nice to be “right”? Wouldn’t it be nice to feel that there is a higher entity which supports our wishes, laws and moral standards?
That is how God appeared. We created him. God is a consequence of the search for survival of the “I.”
Yes, I know… You had “experiences” with angels, divine beings, etc.
Weren’t those “God”?
Yes and No. 🙂
When something out of the ordinary appears in front of us, we call it “divine” or “diabolic.”
That is the issue. Labeling defines. It is merely unique.
If we need to identify that which was unique in our experience, we will label that according to what we know, to what we have been taught.
“God” is a nice label. If many have similar experiences, then that “ holy club” becomes unique and therefore, the “I” will ascend to a very special level.
Do we realize that the “I” is growing its size, due to that “experience”?
Let me go into the “spiritual experience.”
As mentioned before, those experiences are meant to begin a “new” path, to begin a new consciousness. Those experiences are “tools,” for change.
Nevertheless, most will react in the following way:
“I am especial. A chosen one. God has contacted me. Since he came through this religion, idea, philosophy; then that must be the “truth.”
Do we see the flaw in our “logic”?
It is called assumption.
From that point on, it will be about worshiping, believing in things, finding emotional comfort and self-righteousness.
All of the above strengthens the consciousness of the “I.”
If we are able to observe such a diversity of consciousness, ways of living and viewpoints in Life; how is it that we could believe that there is only “one” way if all of the different flavors in Life are showing us the oneness of all?
Every “difference” is part of that Oneness. Every variety of consciousness is part of it.
“But… there must be only one righteous way, the Godly way according to his words…”
If your consciousness is still there, you will not be able to understand what Ananda is conveying. Yes… you are intelligent, prepared, educated. You just have different life experiences than Ananda.
Just allow your consciousness to change when it is the time.
“NO! I cannot let the devil take me away from God!”
Great! Stick with it.
Life will change. “You” will not.
You will change… but “You” will not.
Your stubbornness may take you to heaven in the future, but before that; it may take you into repression and rejection of Life “now.” Way to go! (To heaven..)
There is a religious idea sold out to us. It is called “Martyrdom.”
“Christ died in the cross to save us.” The fact is, he died in the cross because he got in trouble with society at that time. They were not ready to understand him, to go over their beliefs and then 2000 years later, we continue, “repenting from that sin” which none of us here today committed.
That idea of “martyrdom” will make us believe that our suffering is an example for others. It is just another source of admiration, of ego-boost.
The robe of “God” could be wore by anyone fit to it, just like there are many who could fit into the Santa Claus outfit.
Yes… He is still Santa… but No! He isn’t. It all depends in your belief.
We could be children of God, but before that… we are Life itself. “Being” Life.
The following videos are lengthy but worthwhile to watch. It is about the non-Biblical findings of the historical Jesus.
I find these relevant to understand religions. As a matter of fact, most religions will go through the same path.
There is the belief that every monotheistic religion represents God. To make this belief “factual,”is the task of every religion through its clergy. The teachings of those self-realized individuals (known as religious founders) have been misinterpreted, changed and even forgotten. Instead, a set of beliefs and rituals have become important. Hierarchies and organizations have flourished through the growth of a belief system. Greater number of followers, greater power.
Are religions “bad” then? No. Religions are tools for self-transformation. The tool is useful up to a point. Every individual decides that point.
Unfortunately the mind of the “followers,” are not always aligned with the spiritual teachings for lack of experiencing those teachings in themselves.
For example, in this teaching: “If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also.” It is a Christian teaching. That teaching could be easily misunderstood. Please take a look at this article: http://www.beliefnet.com/News/2000/01/The-Limits-Of-Turn-The-Other-Cheek.aspx?p=1
Here the author will plainly defend the “normal” person’s behavior as the obvious way to behave in this day and age. That is, the person who experiences duality at every second. The “normal” person is the person understood by the thinker, the philosopher, the moralist, the social activist, the politician, etc.
The teaching “If someone slaps you on one cheek…” is not part of the Western tradition. As a matter of fact, that teaching will not be understood until we experience oneness in life, that is to see the “other” as yourself. This requires a change of consciousness, not a change in beliefs.
That teaching is beyond the boundaries of traditional Western mentality. That teaching belongs into the Dharmic tradition. It is Buddhist.
When someone spat on Buddha’s face, he did not offer resistance. That non-resistance does not come out of fear or lack of self respect; but comes out of that consciousness of no separation, of oneness of going beyond the limits of individuality. If this teaching is “practiced” it will not work. It needs to be “natural” by getting into that state of consciousness, so that teaching could be understood.
Of course, someone like Nietzsche would disdain the Christian teaching of “giving the other cheek” as creating submission on the strong. He was a thinker, a philosopher not a spiritual person searching for truth by looking at himself. He was a “normal” person.
Thus, it is a wonder that Jesus was giving teachings which were beyond the normal western, roman mentality of the time of “one tooth for one tooth.”
A spiritual teaching is timeless, but understood according to time.
Interesting to note how nowadays, we have different philosophies and approaches to spirituality but all of them seem to point to the same Self Realization, Awakening, Soul consciousness, etc.
This video explains how the “Golden age,” or “Paradise” (depending on your belief) depicts that time before the presence of ego.
Ego appears as a consequence of that entropy which is what gives the experience of duality.
Note how in Christianity, some of the teachings of Christ point to egoless-ness when well “interpreted;” that is from those who have experienced the experience and not from those who only have the degrees (known as “experts” and dwell in “theory.”)
Ego is not “bad” but part of that experience which we call life. It is through the experience of ego, how we will return to “soul consciousness” again, that is awakening.
As Mr. Tolle explained through one of the teachings of Christ, (the parable known as “The prodigal son”) that is how we will go back home, through the understanding of that ego, or by “conquering ego.”
“Back to the Father’s home;” (as in the parable) which is a well known line in Brahma Kumaris.
Good video to watch:
Please read the following carefully to avoid misinterpretations. 🙂
Yesterday, we had a question about God not being “omnipresent.” Let me go a bit further into that.
It is not a secret that in the beginning of Brahma Kumaris, God was seen as being “omnipresent” as known in Christianity; but later on; that concept changed into a “personal God,” known as Shiva.
The above paragraph is seen by some as “evidence” that this knowledge is “wrong.”
Nothing further from the truth.
When Spirituality needs to be explained through words, a scripture will be created and through that scripture a dogma to be “believed” by “believers” which are not usually in tune with spirituality but worldly information which is taken as the building block for further understanding.
This has happened in every known major religion.
In every religion; as those teachings get to the masses, the original spiritual experience will be lost and instead our minds will take over and “rationalization” will start. That is how “others” acquaint themselves with a spiritual experience, through their own rationalization.
At a deeper level of realization on this knowledge, we can see that there is a Drama going on. Therefore, it is an illusion that “someone” is acting in it when there is a role which needs to be performed. However, all that could be changed is the experience that someone has over that role.
Please see this point; experiences are part of that role and it is according to our “interpretation” of those experiences, the way that we will look at the world.
Therefore, what is the aim of living if is not to be able to enjoy the experience that life offers us, by being beyond duality; that is; the “2 faces” of illusion: Sorrow and Pleasure. All spiritual teachings will teach that.
This sort of awareness is what is known as being a “detached observer.” Also known as “karmateet.”
How we get there is what differs among human beings.
Gautama, the Buddha; experienced that without knowledge of how everything works; but he experienced that level of detachment. Consequently, his karmic account changed as well, providing him with a fruitful new birth. Interestingly enough, he did this without the knowledge of God. It is not that Buddha was an atheist, as “intellectual, logical” people will put it.
The Buddha simply, did not think about that question of God’s existence for he was concerned about knowing the self.
Christ reached a similar nature in his life, with the knowledge of God. He considered himself, the “son of God.” His experience of God allowed him to know himself, to recognize himself in relation to God.
In Hinduism and Dharmic religions; we see the same pattern: Some have a God, some others do not. Some see God as being “everywhere” not interpreted as God residing in the dog, the cat, the stones, etc; which is pantheism; but the spiritual vision is that in a “world of illusion” (The movie) the only thing that I could see is God. That is, whatever my concept of God is according to my experience. It is the concept of “unity” by seeing only the ONE.
Note how our interpretation plays a fundamental role in understanding deeper spiritual knowledge.
In the above examples, what we see are different views; different paths. Different experiences as the Drama of life provides; however, the single unique aim in all of those “perceptions of reality” is SELF REALIZATION.
Some need God to realize ego. Some do not. Some only know about the Drama (Taoists) but others do not need that when all there is needed is complete love to God. That is to be lost in love, which paradoxically means, SELF REALIZATION, for we are love.
Some idealize “reaching God.” It is a thought in the mind based on the consciousness of physicality. Here is “you” and here is “God.” We have so much love as a wife has for a husband.
That is a spiritual relationship based on an example of something known in the physical world.
In spirituality to reach that state of self realization is to be ONE with everything. That is at the spiritual level there is no sense of separation, no sense of “you and me” for that ego which brings identity will be gone.
The consciousness at that level is different. That is to be “merged with the Father,” for in that; separation of any kind is just a source of ego, an illusion which is the consciousness that most of us have, because we are attached to the physical world through our consciousness of being just an individual and without realizing that we are connected with everything that exists.
The reason of knowing God at this time, is to know this knowledge; for once we know that then we will understand that our experience of God will be according to our roles. We didn’t have this piece before and we fought with others to demonstrate that “my truth” is the truth.
However, as exquisite the experience may be with God; the aim and objective is SELF REALIZATION. Bottom line.
This knowledge allow us to understand the need of the time. It allows us to see , the importance of reaching that SELF REALIZATION, because according to time, something different is in store in the Drama. THAT IS IT.
However, some will take this opportunity as a way to worship, as a way to get connected with devotion and rituals, etc. to get to “know God,” forgetting the main point of SELF REALIZATION. By knowing the self, we can experience God; for there is no separation at the spiritual level.
Therefore, in the Brahma Kumaris path, the method of “ I AM GOD,” which changed to “GOD is SHIVA,” merely changed the method to pursue that SELF REALIZATION, as explained above. It is a process.
The ones who are concerned with intellectual debates and logic and reasoning, will see that shift as “lack of consistency,” when in fact, it is a necessary step in self realization which Brahma Baba went through.
Methods will differ. God is a being. The way we use God to pursue that SELF REALIZATION is our method.
Every religion has a different method.
Those who would like to dwell on rationality and try to “intellectually” understand something which is not meant to be “intellectually” understood but experienced for SELF TRANSFORMATION, would be caught up in the duality of language: “It is either A or B. But it is not logical to be A and B at the same time.”
“God is omnipresent or He is not.” “God is in Parandham or He is here in the physical world; but He cannot be in both places at once.” “If I am God, then God cannot be Shiva.” (Even though it was explained that at the soul level there is no separation and the “proof” will be your own experience.)
Please see the futility, if you would; the “rational stupidity” of that.
Fortunately for us, there is “Quantum physics.” Then those “logical” and rational individuals will be challenged when there is something here, which exists at the same time, “there.” When something is “this” but at the same time, it is not.
Many paths one aim. SELF REALIZATION.
Every path is made perfectly for every soul. The Drama is beneficial for all.
The paradoxical aspects of reality are finally starting to be grasped by “quantum physics.” There is a possibility, a chance a “hidden card,” which cannot be known by traditional physics and science.
Realizing not knowing is progress leading into knowing.
When we translate that “finding,” in our reality as human beings; we realize that we are not only “humans,” but “beings.” We realize that to be only in the consciousness of a “human,” is not allowing us to see the other half. At the same time, discovering “being” means to realize that we live in the world of humans. That is the balance.
Gyan is very paradoxical; that is why it is very difficult to be understood by “normal” people who have been indoctrinated in analysis, logic and reason alone. The truth is more than that, and I cannot define it or cage it in words.
In Gyan we have the paradox of “free will and predestination.” We have the paradox of “our future is your past and your past is your future.” We have the paradox of the “unique moment,” which will always come back. We have the paradox of being multidimensional beings according to our consciousness: physical, subtle or the soul.
In spirituality and the knowledge of the self; all of that will take us into the paradox of “knowing or perceiving,” the paradox of ego and egoless-ness, the paradox of being trapped in physical consciousness with emotions and dual thoughts; then to move into a subtle consciousness through feelings, to realize the being, the naked self… however, that is not it… then comes “non-being.”
In Gyan those words are represented through the experience of the physical reality which transforms into a more subtle reality to then be aware of the soul which eventually will “return home,” that is to a world of “non- being-ness.” Once there is that “experience” (There is no “experiencer” at that point) then the cycle will repeat, through the experience of the physical realm again. It is a cycle.
The above knowledge is not a “trademark” of Gyan alone. It is “universal knowledge” of the self. The issue is that it has been “interpreted” in different ways by different people who have not had the experience themselves and then used words “literally” not realizing that spirituality cannot be conveyed literally in words. That experience escapes words.
Christianity is a good example of the above. The teachings that we know about Christianity at this point in time being taught, are not really from Christ. Those teachings have been interpreted by the main “disciple,” that is Paul. That is what we usually know.
St. Paul was a roman citizen. He had more education than any other disciple. He was part of the “in” group of the time. He was part of the “higher-ups” at that time.
To make the point, the verse in Matthew 5:39 (TRANSLATED BY THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION) mentions: “But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”
The above is a profound teaching. Here are some interpretations:
and some quotes from Nietzsche, (whose writings I used to enjoy in my teenager days.)
As we can see, everyone has its own interpretation; everyone who does not have an experience on ego, duality, karma and the roles of the soul. An interpretation without Spirituality.
The path of non-resistance has been practiced by many. Gandhi had his own version. At the spiritual level it could mean to “accept” and to strip down that ego who believes in “possessing things.” – “My cheek.” Then, here is everything else for you… 🙂 Buddha also taught something similar when someone spitted on his face. He thanked that person for the opportunity he had to find if there was any anger in him. He told that person that he didn’t have anger. Then when that person came back the next day to ask for forgiveness; Buddha told him that there was nothing to forgive, for that was “yesterday,” and he wasn’t angry. However, if that sense of guilt was so great in him, he could ask for forgiveness to his disciple Ananda, who in fact; became angry by the action of this person.
Different “interpretations” according to our state of consciousness. Many let themselves be taken literally by what the words mean, when the spiritual meaning could be behind those words and could be understood by those who have experienced the experience. Those teachings cannot be understood by the “normal” people who only have analysis, logic and reason in their heads; for spirituality is paradoxical; in the realm of “being and non-being.”
Thank you for your question!
According to Gyan, God is the only soul who can “come and go.” For the rest, once they enter the cycle of time they need to reincarnate and in the case of “religious founders,” those souls will receive their own body in the following birth.
According to the Sakar Murli, the “Christ soul” will take knowledge at some point.
According to the Sakar Murli, “If someone listen to even a little knowledge , he will go to heaven.” (SM 10/9/12)
We know that the Christ soul will be a “new” soul when coming for the first time. Therefore, according to that “reasoning” if we take things literally (danger! danger!); If Christ takes knowledge, Christ should experience “heaven.” See that? 🙂
However, there is the knowledge of the “special roies” of the religious founders including Brahma Baba. Those souls (including Christ) will take knowledge up to what their roles require when founding a religion. That knowledge is needed. That is how we see the differences in religious thoughts around the world. Christians have the knowledge of God and souls and karma, but not about the cycle of time and the Drama. Buddhists know about the cycle of time, karma, meditation, soul; but their understanding of the Supreme Soul is not there. Taoists, have good grasp on the Drama and karma, but not much about God. A religious founder has to take this knowledge at sometime for their knowledge does not appear “out of thin air,” and that is when this knowledge is available. (Now)
None of those religions have the knowledge of the subtle region, for that is a special part that only Brahma Baba has “now” and it is known by Brahmin souls only.