Looking at Godly ego

As mentioned in the last article, the experience of spirituality is very subjective. My experience is only mine and it is an illusion to pretend that it should be true for others, or even apply to others as well.

When looking back at my own life, I could see that my intention to become “good” by shaping up myself when aware of my own shortcomings; started with the experience of Catholicism.

Catholicism wasn’t something that I picked up by analyzing things and coming up with a rational decision. It was something given through the environment as I grew up in Peru; where Catholicism is part of the politics of that society. The conditioning was there and many do not realize the influence of such tradition. However, there was something in me when I was 17 that didn’t click with Catholicism. I was exposed to different religious/ spiritual literature since I had the desire to know. Even attended different religious faiths. Read J. Krishnamurti when I was 23 and was amazed by his clear-cut views, but couldn’t understand how others did not think the same as I did. Then, I forgot all about it, once I was getting ready “to conquer the world and make my dreams come true” in the biggest capitalist society. I felt welcomed to join that new home with such opportunities.

I had the “American dream” accomplished in my mid 30’s. However, fears and lack of satisfaction appeared even though I was “supposed” to be happy. Brahma Kumaris appeared at that time. That experience was unique. It wasn’t my choice and because it was beyond my rational conditioning, it had a very strong influence. I had an experience with what I thought was the true God. I couldn’t pass that new opportunity, for it was my original “raison d’etre.”

That turned my life outside down. I had something new to achieve, to become. My drive was to demonstrate others that I knew God. That was my inspiration to proselytize. I thought I was helping others, but truly; I was helping myself. That was fuel to continue in my journey which I thought was the “truth.”

The amount of ego emerging from that experience is tremendous: “I” know God. “I” know the truth. Not only that but I knew how to put “reasons” to try to demonstrate that what I knew was the “truth.” Without a doubt, there were very few Brahma Kumaris’ followers who could understand “knowledge” as I did. “I was on my way to Heaven.” 🙂

Observe how life puts the experiences necessary for that ego to emerge. “Success” in this world or the world beyond is the same thing. That strong desire to accomplish is ego in disguise. I am not saying that to work to accomplish our dreams in ‘bad,’ no. It is a necessary experience to try to get our hands full with something but yet, remain empty inside.

For that ego to start diluting itself, I had to go through many other experiences. It doesn’t go away because I decide to “conquer it” or to act as if I did not have ego. Usually extreme suffering will cut it off, but that is not the only tool used by Life. It all depends on our own journey.

Looking back, the teaching wasn’t that I needed to find “God.” The teaching was that I needed to observe that ego and for that, it needed to be fat, juicy and big so I could become AWARE of it. Life gave me that experience through the Brahma Kumaris. The outcome, what we ARE, is what has value. Many times we are entertained by trying to find the “truth,” or believing that our experience is the only and true one. That is a mirage.

Life experiences are meant to change our consciousness as long as we become aware of the teachings and not become mesmerized by the teacher, even if that one is “God.”

What did I learn through those experiences? Our service to society is not in revealing who God is, but in revealing ourselves to ourselves while in relation with others. BEING that which we talk about. The rest is only pretty spiritual talk.

The path of truth.

What is truth? That word is usually used in relation with something factual. It is true that I slept last night. It is true that I was a Brahma Kumaris follower, etc. Those are simple facts.

Those facts are seen as truth and therefore most will extrapolate that finding into their spiritual experience.

In spirituality there are many “truths” and not necessarily equal to each other. For instance, who is God? Most every religion has its own take on that. They have their own “patent” on God, but yet they claim to have the “true” God with them. As shared before, spirituality is very subjective in nature. However, there is a common ground which deals with that inherent subjectivity; that is to find your own truth, yourself. There cannot be religions having the truth about each one of us.

In a world where the masses rule, where “majority wins,” and the truth is reflected in that incomplete premise; then we have the world of spirituality which cannot be like the former, but diametrically different just to complement it. A self-realized person is the outcome of the spiritual path. While the masses are interested in “right” answers, a self-realized person knows the truth of himself.

A self-realized man cannot be a politician. He cannot be the one solving problems created by unbalanced minds. His truth is to realize himself and thus, nothing is lacking. There is no further search, the truth is no longer something to seek for it is “within.”

Life has many paths for each individual. There are no recipes of self-realization but we learn to cook as ingredients appear unexpectedly in Life and the beauty of that unfolds: To be able to produce a tasty and wholesome meal to share with others. That is the art. Thus, a self-realized person is there to be recognized by his presence. That is the teaching in itself. It is a living teaching for others in contact with such person.

There is no prototype of what a self-realized man should look like or the way he should behave, for subjectivity is not the measurement stick. His footprints will do the talk.

Life is experiential. Theory, dogma and mental understanding does not change who we ARE. As those life experiences are processed and assimilated without rejection, we will see that Life itself will turn lead into gold. Life is the alchemist, although others may call that alchemist God or the Drama. While those looking for the truth of who the true alchemist is and whether in fact, he/she/it can do that “magic trick;” there are others looking at the truth of that inner change.

At the end, the truth is not in our finding of facts outside of ourselves, that is a mental game only. The truth is in the exploration of the “inside.” Once the inside is found, it will be just like the outside. Therefore, here is my “theory of everything”: Consciousness is the alpha and omega. That sentence cannot be explained for everything will be spoiled. For those who have followed these writings, perhaps it is a good time to realize that “truth” cannot be put into words. It is not a paragraph that we can tell to another, a dogma. It has to be realized…. but yet, i wrote my truth. Isn’t that paradoxical, insane and confusing? Understanding happens when there is no push to try to understand. Until then. 🙂

Is there Life after death? There is a paradox.

That is the question that this businessman is hoping to answer through a contest. Those in the Brahma Kumaris know the answer through their “knowledge,” although that “knowledge” may not be practical in their lives. In other words, fear will be there. Even though they know the “answer.”

For me, the cycle of time is the single most important piece of “knowledge” that I got out of the BK experience. It wasn’t just the theoretical knowledge, the dogma to recite; but I had a practical experience and many other incidents in my life which proved to me the validity of it.

Nonetheless, my experience by no means is the “truth.” I cannot be validated objectively, even if there are experiments through science. Although our world gives plenty of trust to scientific evidence, it is my understanding now, that biases and deep rooted beliefs are also lingering in the mind of many scientists. For instance, if we become acquainted with the experiments of neuroscientist Benjamin Libet, we could observe in his findings that what is known as “free will” may not be. The thought of that implication made many scientists uncomfortable and decided to come up with reasons as to why that experiment wasn’t reliable. After all “free will” must survive, for it is obvious we have, correct?

Scientists and philosophers made things more complex by not agreeing with a “definition” of what “free will” is, although everyone else may know what that is but just cannot put it in words. There are many kinds, according to their thoughts. Researchers came up with the term “Free won’t” as the alternative to “free will.” Basically, if actions are initiated before being conscious of it, we still have the chance to stop performing those when aware. That is to use of our “volition.”

However, that volition requires careful observation and awareness. Many times, that “free won’t” is another name for conditioning kicking in. “Free won’t” is the “cure” used systematically in our society: “I felt like doing that action, but I stopped it,” and then we give a learned reason. We perceive this as something positive. The other side of such “cure,” is the control beyond our true impulses which lead us into repression. Nevertheless, not everyone has the “free won’t” program fully installed as we wish, so they can make “sane decisions,” and not every action will give us the chance to allow for that program to kick in within hundreds of a second of an unconscious drive.

As we can see, all these reasons make up more words and lenghty papers, to debate about.

Our society will need to be free of such biases to have a different understanding. There is a need to challenge every belief. The cycle of time is being explored as an alternative of the well known “big-bang” linear belief of time.

The cycle of time is a circle, with no beginning or end. That is hard to imagine in our conditioned society where there must be a beginning. Moreover, the cycle of time will show us that “time” may be another constant illusion but with practical value in our society. Constant change in Life, means constant newness. There is no true referential static point, but yet our minds allow us to do so. That means, that there is no “I” as a reference, but yet we use that reference all the time. This paradox is another constant in our duality perceived Universe: Time exists, but doesn’t. “I” exist but do not. “Free will exists” but it doesn’t.

Therefore, the cycle of time leads into predestination or determinism through cause and effect, which in turn recycles into the “Eternal Return” for every thing changes but it comes back to be the same, again. Yet another paradox. We cannot bathe in the same river twice, but we will. Another paradox.

Finally, we live in the outer shell of cyclical time and determinism but in the inner shell of linear time and free will. The inside is the outside and vice versa.

The greatest paradox could be that there is no death, but yet “we” die.

Transmigration and the BK belief in the existence of animals in the Golden Age

It is my understanding now, that Brahma Kumaris’ philosophy had a part of what we could label as “truth” in Life, but not all of it. In fact, no religion or philosophy could ever have it for they only explain a small part of the whole. In Brahma Kumaris, there is the belief of reincarnation of souls into the same species, that is human souls can only reincarnate in human bodies; whereas transmigration allows for a soul to change species according to its particular plan of experiences.

From that perspective, I remember the BK story about a follower who asked BapDada about how animals appeared in the Golden Age. BapDada’s answer was something like: “Don’t worry about the furniture there.” Without a doubt, it is a pertinent answer when a follower lives in the mind and only cares about “right” answers and not much about personal transformation.

Despite the fact that my question has no significance in self transformation, here it is for your entertainment. This question could be asked to the sister in charge at the BK center near you: “What does an animal DO to deserve the Golden age?” That could be enough to stir the pot. According to BK philosophy only certain animal species will be in the Golden Age and within that species, not every member could be in the Golden Age. What makes the difference? The expected “right” answer is something like : “Baba hasn’t disclosed that.” Thus, here another question: Is the soul world only a “place” for human souls divided in a tree of religions? Since animals are souls as well, “where” are they? Are they divided into species? 🙂

The Universe is continuously evolving. Consciousness is all there is to be able to perceive and feel alive. Every species including animals, plants and even minerals have some sort of consciousness.

Observe your pet (if you have one, as it is considered “pukka” not to have one in the BK world. Personally I am not fond of having pets of any kind, but my family here in Peru has a dog. )

In that observation, I couldn’t help but notice that my family’s dog “only needs to learn to talk” to be just like another human. I wonder if perhaps in that evolution of consciousness, in its “next life” that dog could be a human (Transmigration)? After all, that dog has lived 98% with humans and only 2% with other dogs of its kind. Wouldn’t that have a karmic consequence? That is just an observation that I wanted to share. That conversation could easily change into how is it possible for cows to be non violent animals but yet have to endure great suffering in most of the world through places for slaughter? What sort of karma is behind that?

One of the things that I learned is that there are no absolutes in Life. Observe the symbol of the “Yin and Yang.” I couldn’t say something like: “All animals experience transmigration,” or “ All Bks will be angels,” for I know that cannot be. Every soul path is different and it does not have to fit a belief system created by someone. In that the Universe, Life itself is always unpredictable.

What if there is intelligent Life is another planet? How could philosophies of many distinct religions could fit that “reality”? As a follower would you leave because your belief no longer fits a new “reality”? Or perhaps you have discovered something more important, an inner change that you value and you know that it couldn’t have been possible, without the aid of your belief system.

Something to reflect about.