Contradictions in the perception of separation
There is the person, the “I,” which is mostly viewed as a separate entity.
That perception is the origin of our society, laws and views about Life.
We perceive Life as a set of separate things, circumstances or beings. Typically, we do not see the relationship, but Life is truly relationship.
Life is like a movie. A movie has different characters just like Life. A movie has a protagonist, the main character; the center of the plot. However, in Life there is no protagonist, there are different stories which could be weaved at one point in time just to be unweaved.
In the perception of separation, the end justifies the means. Nevertheless, what is the end to be justified if something is weaved to be unweaved again? Perhaps to control. That is usually detrimental for the common good.
In Life things evolve in a subtle way, little by little so change is not grossly perceived. In the Human world change is typically abrupt, violent, with hidden agendas.
The perception of separation builds division but creates the ideal of unity at the same time, which cannot be achieved. Laws will be created to support behaviors which call for unity but yet are contradictory to the essence of the perception of separation, which is egotism: We are taught to build our egos but yet “teach” Love.
We talk about Love, but we AREN’T Love: How could we accept someone at every moment just as that person IS, even ourselves (which is Love) without judgment, when we have different teachings and conditioning inside to separate, label and classify another?
In Life, every story is different although with similar plots. Each story is delimited by our ability to perceive relationships. Thus, someone could only see two people involved while others could see many more.
The ones who have been greatly influenced by separation, cannot see beyond themselves or their small group. Therefore, how could this person be concerned with the common good, Love and unity?
Beyond our limits
Let us say that the world is a “shoe box.” There is “John” all by himself in it.
What would be “moral or immoral” for John? What would be “right or wrong” for John?
Answer: What he believes to be.
Let us say that there is another person who joins John later on.
What would be “moral or immoral” to do? What would be “right or wrong” to do?
Answer: it depends on their belief.
Besides beliefs, there are matter of fact consequences. John may enjoy the company of that other being for he was alone before, but at the same time, John likes to have his own space all for himself.
If john was a “black or white” type of individual; he will either choose to be alone or to have company. There is no awareness of integrating both experiences without choosing.
The paradoxical and beautiful thing about the world is that every moral value, every belief system that someone may cherish as “truth” is contradicted by another living species in Nature.
Do you think that a caste system, a hierarchy based on being born in certain social class is “bad”?
Take a look at bees and ants.
Do you think that family life is a thing of the past?
Take a look at how wolves live.
Do you think that to be a loner and to mingle with the opposite gender just to procreate is to take advantage of someone?
Take a look at the life of tigers.
If we observe life as it is in Nature and not the artificially created “world at the office,” we will discover those beautiful contradictions, which make this world what is.
What could be God’s law then, in the observation that every species of “his” creation acts contradicting any written law that could ever be?
Perhaps there is a law for every species?
I have not seen any written codes of conduct for Tigers yet. But because there is that diversity around, could I make myself such a narrow minded, judgmental person who takes sides to label something as “good or bad”?
If there was a law of “good and bad” coming from God himself wouldn’t that be a contradiction of what already exists?
That is why many individuals have decided to create their “own world” in their own “shoe box” to fit their beliefs as “righteous” in their world.
As John’s “shoe box” becomes populated, there is obviously a problem of “logistics” in the human world that animals are unaware of.
Thinking, logic, analysis creates that contradiction which a human being will pretend to resolve through moral standards.
An animal adapts and harmoniously is able to live in balance with its surroundings.
A thinking, “rational” human being is unable to adapt like that.
The question is not “why is that?” because that will take our logic and rationality into greater contradictions.
The point is to observe, feel and act.
Nature has a completely different way of manifesting beyond logic, rationality and belief systems… well beyond our “office world” morality.
The “world of the office,” John’s “shoe box” has rationality, analysis, judgment, comparisons, separation, and, ifs, or, not … computer operations, that we have learned to troubleshoot by breaking the problems in “halfs” until we discover the “culprit.”
Nature does not work like that.
Which world do we choose?
Wrong question if we could see beyond duality, but a rational “good” question for those who cannot.
Integrate everything. Welcome the “office world” and Nature. Experience both.
At that point, we could understand practically that “God” could never have given us any laws to be followed, but to allow us to make sense of things for ourselves…Not intellectually, but by using our “instincts.”
That is insight, intuition, love for the Totality, appreciation of what is, gratefulness and a sense of balance.
When we discover in ourselves what is beautiful, then we have discovered what we have in common with “his” creation.
Karma, Drama, Predestination and…. Confusion
“Om Shanti, Dear Brother, I have asked this question many times to many BKs but the answer i got was not convincing. We believe the fact that karma is my choice and man makes his own destiny we also believe the fact this world is a drama and it repeats itself and its predestined. Now, does that mean that my karma’s are also fixed, its just that i am making a ‘choice’ to make it happen according to the drama. Or If i have my freewill in doing the karma then how can the world drama be fixed it should vary every time. Please clarify. Regards”
Thank you for your question, dear reader… Avyakt7 has responded that question many times already in this blog, but you know… every time avyakt7 responds, it is somewhat a different response… 🙂
Here is my “straight” answer to the point and my latest “discovery..”
Dear reader, just forget about all of those concepts, dualistic ideas and beliefs.
The important thing is “NOW.” That is, are you happy? Are you at peace with yourself? Are you in harmony with everything? If not… why not? Discover that, Be it then Do it and all the above concepts will be taken care of for your benefit. That is all. 🙂
Even though, the above is avyakt7’s “best answer ever,” you may be hungry for concepts, you may be willing to get an explanation to answer your great question and finding.
You see, if most readers would go into these types of questions about “pure gyan,” without their own “hang ups” and were truly looking for answers rather than looking to conform with dogmas; many things will be discovered. But, reality is that it is easier to believe, to follow, to pretend to understand, etc.
So, here it is my long “conceptual” answer for intellectual “theory” minds.
The knowledge taught by the Brahma Kumaris is indeed a very deep knowledge. It is that deep that it was put in very simple terms by Brahma Baba, so uneducated people could be able to grasp it back then.
The issue is that because people’s tendencies is to take things literally, then dogma appeared and “black or white” thinking was established. This is not “bad.” It is necessary for the “majority,” who are engrossed in devotional practices and truly are unable to grasp deeper insight. This is not “bad” either. It is called “numberwise.” To have a deep mind is not necessary at all to really understand the simplicity of life and to live happy “NOW.” BUT, “NOW” we have different times than back then.
This is something that many do not realize.
Thus, you found that “my karma” and my “free will” or “choice” contradicts “predestination” and “eternal repetition.” Great finding! 🙂
When you are caught up in the “logic” of those concepts, there will be no “logical” answer. So, you will get at best the typical: ” We have a certain extent of free will, but there is also predestination.”
That is the popular “whishy washy” answer, or you can get a “fundamentalist” who will assure you that we have “free will” and that is why God can punish us for our misbehaviors… Or someone who can tell you that predestination is all there is and thus, you are destined to be someone.. You are a “puppet of destiny,” and there is nothing you can do about it.. 😦
Dear reader, everything in this Drama depends on our state of consciousness and not on how much logic we can think of.
When there is the consciousness of “I,” that is when the problem starts. Then “I” either feel trapped or “I” feel that “I” have a choice. However, as explained in many articles already and pointed out by many gurus and BapDada himself, the “I” is an illusion. Individuality is an illusion. Just because you have a body and “I” have a body, it doesn’t mean that we are “individuals” when in the Drama there is interdependence. Individuality is conceptual based on physical observation.
When we understand that “roles” are being acted through “us,” then we will forget about the biggest lie of all: “I do.” It is another illusion. It is a role going through. That is what we call the Drama when looked at from the unlimited perspective, but when looked at from the limited, we call that “karma.”
Now, imagine for a moment an ego-less being. The one who is aware of “I” the soul, not as individuality but as being conscious of existence. How is that? A 3 year old is conscious of existence but he does not have consciousness of individuality yet. Now, for that soul conscious being, who is self aware, the roles running through him will be viewed as that: roles. That is a detached observer. Therefore, the concepts such as “free will” or “predestination,” will be completely meaningless for that being. Why?
Because that being is capable of being complete, fulfilled just by “BEING,” so “doing” is completely irrelevant. 🙂 (as on the other hand, it is relevant for an ego centered mind.)
However, as “doing” is aligned with “being,” his “doing” will be completely ego-less; that is, it will be beneficial, for it will go according to the Drama…and as we know…“The Drama is beneficial for all.”
As long as we are caught up in the consciousness of “I” as ego, we will only see conceptual contradictions. Nevertheless, now you can see how we arrive to avyakt7’s “best answer ever,” but after going through so many words.
Now, you could understand why a simple explanation of “karma” as being bad or good or neutral is used by the Brahma Kumaris. There is no such a thing as that. That is conceptual understanding. It is like trying to hold a picture and call it the “truth,” when there is a movie instead.
It is just a matter of consciousness, and everything is necessary as it is, however; there is a return on that which is neither good nor bad…necessary. Those roles will take us to a big circle.
Dear reader: Where is the destination in a big circle? 🙂 That is why “according to time” we know where the Drama is being directed. That is all we need to be aware of.
However, when it is about making the “little children,” understand deep concepts in easy to digest “good or bad” actions, then the explanation by Brahma Kumaris is “good.” But when you realize those contradictions…that is when you “grow up”… oh boy! do not ask those questions unless you want to get in trouble.. 🙂 The same has happened in every religion. Nothing new.
Contradicting Contradictions to find the range of truth.
As far as I am concerned, all deep religious/philosophical treaties contradict their own premises. Paradoxes, contradictions, “half truths,” and ambivalent answers are given. Life is not logical, neither reasonable. Therefore, those scriptures or philosophies have to match life to be “true.”
The more “black or white” a scripture is, the more suffocated and restricted or suppressed their followers will feel.
A “box of logical laws” will be created and life cannot be contained in a box of human made laws. It becomes a timing bomb ready to explode at any time. Spirituality is not like following “automobile traffic laws.”
Therefore, to show the depth of BK gyan, we need to explore contradictions as well.
The Murli introduces the concept of contradictions as being part of truth.
A contradiction being true?
If I say, “I am a male,” I can contradict myself by saying : “ I am a female” in another occasion.
However, both of those statements could be “true” in their own time.
We know that a female could be trapped in a male body. It is a matter of consciousness.
A “normal” individual will say: “You can only be A or B. Choose. You cannot be A and B at the same time.”
They will call that logic. A reasonable premise. Life of a female trapped in a male body will show us that “reason” could be sheer hell. 🙂
Contradictions are not logical. But, contradictions explain the range of “the truth.”
This is something that “intellectual” individuals fail to understand. These individuals are good at analyzing things, presenting information in a logical, reasonable way and even with supporting evidence from the “almighty scientific community.” (which are mostly intellectual individuals.) However, when explaining a deep spiritual concept,logic and reason become a handicap for they will not be able to go into the depth of the experience and only will be able to describe something using intellectual concepts.
Let us go into a practical example:
Baba says: “if you understand the knowledge then you belong.” At the same time: “Make sure that they understand Alpha first, without it, they cannot understand anything.” and then: “If they don’t understand, don’t waste time with them” and then: “Everyone should have this knowledge. Make everyone like yourself.” And finally the popular: ”what Baba can do if it is not in the child fortune to understand.”
See? Plenty of contradictions. Is understanding gyan in a person’s fortune or are the “children” the ones who have to make this happen or it is in the person’s intellect to recognize the “truth”?
Now, this is a logical, reasonable question, which does not understand the process of “truth in time.”
The person asking this “good question,” doesn’t get it… 😉 (That is their fortune!)
It is “all and none” at the same time. 🙂 No logical, huh?
Baba’s gyan may need to be looked at under the premise of circumstances/timing/aim of talk. Otherwise, the points contradict each other from an intellectual viewpoint. That is why many times intellectual individuals could be frustrated when hearing the Murli. Others, who are not intellectual, will take those points as simple instructions to follow in the day.
Few will realize that those contradictions are just showing the range of truth, which changes in time.
Life gives us a shade of possibilities which cannot be grouped by our language. Please see this: “Our language is very limited.” To live by words alone, is to live by “black or white” ideas. It is a cage. It is like being trapped inside a coffin while still alive.
Life teaches us that we can give the knowledge to someone and that one may not understand. At that point we may say: “It is not in their fortune or even: “Baba said not to waste my precious confluence age time with them.”
By doing so, we do not understand the richness of life and its possibilities. If it is in the fortune of someone, that one will understand the knowledge at its “own time.”
My “role” or part plays and there is always a seed to be planted which will grow and raise when its due time arises. Nothing in our roles is in “vain” for we are all connected through the “seed” of the Drama of life.
Everything comes at its own time, if it is meant to be.
Contradictions are needed to explain deeper understanding but they can show our lack of it, as well. 🙂
yet another wonderful Paradox… I love gyan!
Brahma Kumaris Knowledge in a Nutshell: Beyond traditional Western thought
13. Brahma Kumaris gyan in a nutshell for Westerners
Everything that exists has always existed but its form changes in “time.” In other words, “matter cannot be created neither destroyed; only transformed.” (First law of Thermodynamics)
For Westerners this concept requires a “creator.” Things cannot come out of nothing. Someone has to create things. Welcome to the concept of God as a “creator.”
In Brahma Kumaris gyan (BK,) there is no need for a “creator.” (but there is a God who does not create.) Since existence has always existed.
For Westerners, time is linear. For this reason a “Creator” is needed or a “big bang” to originate things (Although the “Big Bang” does not explain how the original elements got there in the first place) to find a “beginning.”
In Brahma Kumaris gyan, time is cyclical and eternally repetitive. There is neither beginning nor end.
Nature presents that pattern already. Day becomes Night then Night becomes Day, and so on, in a repetitive fashion. There is “eternal recurrence.” Therefore, we; human beings cannot be essentially matter (matter changes form after death,) we have to be spiritual in nature for spiritual/immaterial energies are immutable to the changes in matter. Thus, reincarnation is a necessity for existence to continue.
This identical repetition of cycles emerges the concept of “predestination.”
Westerners believe in “free will.” However, there is no realization that all the “gifts”/”weaknesses” when we are born, are not a matter of choice. These characteristics give every human being tools for their own development in life. It is almost as pre-determined.
The concepts of “free will and predestination” however, are faulty for it is neither that thoughts appear out of our own volition or out of compulsion due to some force of destiny. The understanding of paradoxes is important here as well as the understanding of the “movement of life,” which in Brahma Kumaris is known as the “Drama.” this is known in Taoism as the “flow of the Universe.”
The Drama represents the ‘story of life’ in our planet. It is a story representing dualistic forces at play: Day changes into Night. New becomes Old, just to repeat again. There is a process in time. It is the story on how “Yin changes into Yang and Yang into Yin.” These changes are what bring experiences in our lives.
When the Drama is viewed as an individual part, related to a particular soul performing actions; those activities have causality. Which is known as the law of “cause and effect” or karma. When we see “karma” as a totality, we can perceive what the “Drama” of life is.
As population tends to increase, we can realize that not every soul is in this planet at the same time. Therefore; we have different experiences according to the time that we “first” arrived. This easily explains the differences in religious views and understandings. Everyone points to the truth, but not everyone could understand a particular view point other than their own. Many times, our own experience makes up our own’s reality. Every religion has adherents as well as school of philosophies. BK knowledge (when studied in depth) points out that every belief system is the “right one for every individual” because “variety” is the norm at this time. It wasn’t like this always. From variety we go into uniqueness and from uniqueness into variety. Those different degrees of change of quality from one extreme to the other in the experience of matter, is what is commonly known as “entropy.” (Second law of thermodynamics.)
This drama of life is beneficial and “souls” experience the range of duality according to their own capacity. The paradox is that even though we are essentially the same (souls,) we are different. That difference makes different tasks that a “soul” (through a body) could perform at a particular point in time, that is known as a “role” or the “mission” in a particular lifetime.
For a Brahma Kumaris adherent, this explanation is the “proof of God,” for even though several philosophies/religions have touched different aspects of the above explanation, no one was able to put this together. The primary questions of Who am I? What am I doing here? Where do I go? have remained a mystery.
Those questions are finally answered within the premises of its own knowledge. It has a supportive basis within its philosophy and the experiential part, in its practice. Brahma Kumaris philosophy is 100% experiential. It is the study of the self to know everything else.
The understanding of the above is not something easily “digestible” for an analytical mind (usually westerners) for many concepts are highly paradoxical and contradictive, ( for things are not “black or white” but there is a range of colors in between which labels and definitions cannot describe.)
The “truth” is not logical nor reasonable but highly paradoxical. It can only be experienced but not talked about. That is the challenge! 🙂