Tagged: avyakt murli Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • avyakt7- New Generation 10:12 AM on September 19, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: avyakt murli, , , buddhi, , , ,   

    Consciousness is not the “intellect.” 

    In Brahma Kumaris most “Sakar Murlis” speak highly about the “intellect.” (A good intellect, the power of the intellect) as a matter of fact, the intellect is one of the 3 aspects of a soul, according to BK knowledge.

    The word “buddhi” is used and its translation is “intellect.”
    Someone with a western mentality, conditioned to believe in the powers of reason and logic, will immediately believe that reason and logic equates “intellect.”

    Avyakt7 was praised many times as having a “good intellect” by BK members back in my days as BK. What was the origin of that? Because avyakt7 could “churn” the Murli.

    Although to “churn” the Murli is highly intellectual, it has no connection with a “higher” consciousness.

    This is an example of a translation that leaves a lot to be desired.

    The word is consciousness.

    Consciousness is part of the role of soul. That consciousness will develop through Life experiences. It can go “up” or “down” (just to give it labels so the explanation could be understood) from previous consciousness; but all is according to the range of experiences that need to be experienced.
    “Entropy” is another word that loosely is translated as going from “order into chaos.” That translation is typical of a conditioned mind through the teachings of our society.

    Upon further observation in Nature, we could perceive that chaos and order go together. Order will bring chaos little by little and Chaos at its utmost state will move into Order.

    Brahma Kumaris knowledge is static in nature and uses referential points. For example, it divides the world cycle into 4 states: “Satopradhan, Sato, Rajo and Tamopradhan” to conveniently fit the 4 ages in the Kalpa.

    This mental separation automatically brings adherence of the follower to a particular state (Sato) and rejection to another (Tamo.)
    In fact, if the follower was to realize that there cannot be “Sato” without “Tamo,” then his attitude and vision could change. This is to be “unlimited” as BapDada points out.

    How is it that BapDada in the avyakt Murlis, has added new light through new terminology that is not typically considered by a BK?
    That is something for every BK to “churn” about.

    Sakar Murlis have their place, but to go beyond the knowledge of “black or white,” means to go into the avyakt Murlis.

    For the common good.

    Advertisements
     
    • Dinesh 2:40 PM on September 19, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Yeah bro…the intellect according to BKs is the decision making faculty of the soul…but isn’t all those decisios based on the the info n knowledge we feed inside mind? And intellect uses that stored info to come up with the decision! This is what I was taught in the first lesson 😊

      Like

  • avyakt7- New Generation 12:20 PM on August 10, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 6 day course, avyakt murli, , , , , , , who am I?   

    Rephrasing the answer: Who AM I? 

    Brahma Kumaris is the path of the intellect, by extension; the mind.
    The mind is happy with concepts, definitions. The mind is OK with a promise of something “good” in the future.
    If Brahma Kumaris promises the follower to be SOMEONE, I wonder how the question asked in the first day of class of the “6 day course, “ WHO AM I? is related.

    Basically, it comes down to this: You are a “soul” but you will be SOMEONE in the future.
    What is that SOMEONE that Brahma Kumaris promises?
    A deity, an angel, etc. etc.

    The word “soul” is merely a concept. The mind accepts that concept for it is insurance for the afterlife. Most individuals are not feeling at ease by knowing that we have a limited time. We will die. This consciousness of what we think to BE, will perish, disappear.
    The ego-mind, wants to continue on. The IDEA of BEING a soul brings that soothing relief for: “I am eternal.”

    However, who is that “I”? Most will not get this question. Even though BapDada has mentioned in Avyakt Murlis.

    Right now, we are merely a role. That is the “I.” That role will disappear, will change.
    If “I” am only conscious of the role, “I” could believe that this is the “I” that will survive eternally. It is not like that.

    Therefore, to be “soul conscious” is to go beyond the roles. Paradoxically, going beyond means to go beyond becoming SOMEONE in the future, for that is only a role.
    Do you see where I am getting at?

    WHO I AM? IS NOT the role. Is not the IDEA, the concept of being a “soul.” It is only to observe who I am “NOW.”
    Do we observe anger? Do we observe detachment? Those things “I AM.” It is in the realization of that who I AM, how change happens, transformation occurs, without DOING things to AVOID that who I AM, without using my mind to separate the “good from the bad, what “should be” instead of “what is.”

    The “soul” contains all the roles. Without a role we are NOBODY. Do we see that?

    I am not a soul.
    I am not a body.
    I am nobody.
    Yet, when we are unable to discern the roles playing, we believe that to be ME.

    When we are deeply sleeping, who are we? Is the “soul” sleeping?
    When consciousness appears after sleep, is that out of my own will?

    But yet, we feel that we KNOW because we repeat: I AM A SOUL, not a body.
    But yet the body is what our consciousness actually discerns as BEING ME.
    Perhaps a mirage, an illusion but that is “what is,” right now.
    Why deny it? Why go with an idea (soul) to reject what it is obvious?
    Here is when HONESTY will take us into a different direction. Acknowledge your consciousness. That is where you ARE. 

    Once our OBSERVATION increases, we will realize that using the concepts of soul or body, will not allow me to observe what is going on inside… that is what I AM NOW.

    For the common good.

     
    • Gayathri 11:53 AM on August 12, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Om shanti. You have explained it very well brother. Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dinesh C 5:30 AM on August 14, 2017 Permalink | Reply

        There is an explanation in the first lesson that Soul works through three faculties, namely, 1. Mind 2. Intellect and 3. Sanskars (Personality traits), but when I kind of realized that Soul is experienced beyond the all these three, my perception has changed quite a lot. I think Mind and Intellect involve a lot of prejudice and duality, confusion sometimes, but if we want to realize our true self, we should try to go beyond that 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  • avyakt7- New Generation 7:00 AM on March 30, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: avyakt murli, , , , , , , , politics,   

    Questions: BapDada’s ways… 

    ..Although I have left BKs completely, don’t do amrit vela, no more morning murli classes thrice a week… 🙂 But recently, I started reading murli’s again from a different consciousness, not the judgemental consciousness but with inquisitive awareness 🙂
    So recently, bapdada has spoken about comparison between double foreigners and Indians (Bharatwasis), first bapdada goes on a tour with his children for something that he only knows!

    Now the first question here is, does that tour actually happens or it is a way of bapdada teaching something to his children through some way of telling a story kind of thing?

    Thank you for your question. “Inquisitive awareness” is not a different type of consciousness. It is your same consciousness with a different belief system. That is all.
    Your first answer is BOTH. BapDada moves in a different level (subtle) which most individuals in the physical plane are unaware of. The subtle level has great impact on the physical level.

    He goes ahead and states that on his tour he saw that Westerners have started becoming more spiritual than Indians, although spirituality belongs to Indians and not westeners!
    Now second question is, why baba is comparing at first and secondly how come spirituality belongs to only Indians and not to entire humanity? Why Indians are said by baba to be of highest thing, and westerner of low clan! Isn’t it prejudice!

    Second answer: Baba is making a point by using a comparison. Yes, “Spirituality” was made up by Indians. The Guru that could walk on water, the one who could be buried alive for many days and still live, the one who could project his image to many followers in different cities at the same time, the one who could get favors from spirits, the one who could do many “miracles,” the one who could predict the future etc… and their methods to be “more spiritual” such as mortifying the body, denying pleasure to the senses, controlling eating, sleeping, breathing, sex, etc. Who invented all that “spirituality”? Indians for the most part. That is the spirituality exported to Westerners.
    Most “normal” people will look for those “spiritual masters” for show value or need.
    Ahnanda has shared that he does not see any value in the word “spirituality” but rather in “living Life with joy.” That kind of “spirituality” does not belong to Indians, but to the whole world.

    I have never heard in a Murli, that Baba is making the point that Indians “are higher and Westerners of lower clan.” As far as I see, that “prejudice” may be only a distortion of your mind unless you could show more evidence.

    He goes further and says that today, countries are being run helplessly (in majbori), politicians are not willing to run the countries but they still for the sake of just doing it!
    Third question is, why God is interfering in politics and all, here on earth, people who attain enlightenment don’t speak about politics at all! That’s what my knowledge about enlightened beings says! How God can comment on politics! He says that we need souls of flying stage (udti kala) to run a country properly!

    The answer of your third question is : You are generalizing through a belief that enlightened beings do not speak about politics.
    An enlightened individual could speak about politics and say any words he wishes to, depending on the need of time and circumstances. Jesus was part of the politics of his time. His crucifixion was all politics. Similarly, Osho was in jail in the USA for political reasons. Enlightenment does not mean to be restricted to comply with some belief that “this is spiritual” and “that is not.”

    Well, I request you to take these questions that I have asked and please help us in understanding from a different consciousness.

    I cannot help anyone understand from a different consciousness. Consciousness happens.

    For the common good.

     
    • Dinesh Chawla 11:58 AM on April 1, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Okay, thank you so much for yours answers, after I read answers and while I was reading, I got a few thing from myself, is Ahnanda not being SELF contradictory in his second answer! Can comparison be used with BEING with comparison!
      well if I go ahead with my reply, I will simply be argumentative and may be like my ego will start proving me right rather accepting Ahnanda’s answers!
      Ahnanda has advised us to be free from words, to go beyond words, I personally too think that it’s time for me to go beyond words and seek more of my own SILENT consciousness 🙂

      Like

      • Dinesh Chawla 11:59 AM on April 1, 2017 Permalink | Reply

        I mean “Can comparison be used without BEING with comparison” 🙂 in above reply.

        Like

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel