The Tree of religions and the formation of souls in Paramdham

It is the understanding within Brahma Kumaris, that souls occupy a “place” in the soul world according to the religions that those souls belong to. The founder of every religion is the head of that particular “section.” It is interesting to notice that since every soul has a “part recorded,” then what is the need for such arrangement? There is no need for it.

Even if a soul was located in some “far away” part from the top, when the time comes for that soul to appear on the physical stage, that soul will be there. It is automatic.

Another consideration is the meaning of the label “religion.” It is usually taught to mean “re-ligare” or to reconnect [with God.] That meaning has been attributed to St. Augustine, but there are several etymological meanings: From a sense of “right or moral obligation” to “respect of what is sacred.” That is from dharma to worship and anything in between.

Nevertheless, a religion is a socio-cultural phenomena made by humans for humans. The accuracy of history of religion can be contested. However the anthropocentric view of spirituality is evident. An organized religion is only important in the human world. To put together a relationship of souls with religions but forgetting about souls of animals, is without a doubt an issue.

It is infantile to believe that a BK shouldn’t eat meat, because it is “tamopradhan” food. That is only to negate something by placing a label with negative connotation to it. The unavoidable fact for those believing in souls, is that in every animal there is also a soul. While some humans may believe that souls of animals are lower than humans; that is only from that anthropomorphic view but that cannot be the way the Universe dictates. Why?

There is no evidence given by Life and the Universe itself, showing that humans are above any other species. Do we see that? When there is an “act of God,” animals and humans will perish equally. The gift of Life is the same for both.

As we are aware of the law of “karma,” we could easily observe how an experience given to another, will be experienced by the giver as well. This is not punishment or reward (again, that is a human conditioned way to understand Life) or “justice,” it is merely cause and effect.

An animal could eat and kill another animal to survive. That is a given according to that consciousness. However; as that consciousness evolves, we could observe a human being with animal tendencies with the added human conditioning of gaining “profit,” in their minds. That sense of living for profit is very human, indeed.

Within the human species, there are different sets of consciousness. For instance, while some may refrain to eat meat; there are different reasons for that decision, showcasing the state of consciousness of such individuals. For instance, someone may do it for “health reasons,” which is the typical profit in mind reasoning. Others, may do it because they do not want to be part of the in-humane slaughter of animals. There is a sense of compassion and empathy. That shows a different, more evolved consciousness within the human race. However, when a religion states that “You should not eat meat because it is impure or Tamopradhan,” that is the imposition of fear to someone who may not be ready to take the jump. If that person still resides within the more animal like consciousness, that person will repress and suffer what is not yet natural for him.

In a nutshell, that tree in Brahma Kumaris should reflect consciousness and not religion as the boundaries of going near the “seed” of the tree.