Revision as of 19:12, 25 April 2006 editRussBlau (talk | contribs)7,732 edits Copyediting← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:03, 26 April 2006 edit undoGreen108 (talk | contribs)490 edits →CopyeditingNext edit → | ||
Line 295: | Line 295: | ||
I spent a fair amount of time the other day copyediting this article, correcting erroneous word usage, punctuation, and spacing -- ''without'' changing the substance of the article -- and was unhappy to see that all this work was undone by some editor who apparently does not understand the correct usage of English. I have re-placed the {{tl|cleanup-copyedit}} tag on the article because there is still much work to be done fixing these issues. This is ''not'' an issue about the content of the article, but simply about correct English usage. --] ] 19:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC) | I spent a fair amount of time the other day copyediting this article, correcting erroneous word usage, punctuation, and spacing -- ''without'' changing the substance of the article -- and was unhappy to see that all this work was undone by some editor who apparently does not understand the correct usage of English. I have re-placed the {{tl|cleanup-copyedit}} tag on the article because there is still much work to be done fixing these issues. This is ''not'' an issue about the content of the article, but simply about correct English usage. --] ] 19:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
I am very sorry, it was me who changed it back, not because of your editing, but because some idiot decided to remove some of the links without raising any issue here in the discussion. I am so fed up of bks coming on here trying to hijack this article for their ends, and I have re written links so many times i did just re instate the whole article out of frustration. The fool had also removed a whole paragraph. | |||
I apologise again, I didn't mean to undo whatever good work was done, but this does get a bit infuriating after a while ] 18:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Green 108 |
Revision as of 18:03, 26 April 2006
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
B.K.s beware !
This is a polite warning to followers of Brahma Kumari Raja Yoga ...
- Beware, this is not an advert for Brahma Kumari Raja Yoga. This is an objective definition of you and your religion.
If you are new to Raja Yoga and unsure of what is being written here, please check with your senior sister for accuracy before removing or editing facts.
Thank you.
Contributors wanted
But please join the discussion page before making your edits. Outright vandalism will be reported.
Destruction
This article refers to the " destruction of the World " meaning the similar to understanding most Christians have of Armageddon or modern day Christian evanglists call " end times ". It is referred to by the BKWSU as " Destruction " and so that is the term used here, as clarified in the article. It does not mean the destruction of the planet Earth. 195.82.106.244 22:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Neutrality of this information
NPOV dispute 70.119.13.124 14:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC) It is evident that the person who originated this article does not sympathize with Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University. Reasons:
1)There is no need to add a heading such as B.K.s beware! if the person truly thought this article was written in good faith and neutral.
2)There are links which rather than further explaining about the subject matter: Brahma Kumaris, those links basically point to groups that are non Brahma Kumaris related. It is sort of trying to explain Christianity by pointing to links were non-christian believers or supporters express their opinions.
3)There is obvious misinformation about the knowledge, practices and the meaning of "spiritual university." Most of the information given is just the experience of the writer (negative experience) with perhaps a particular group. That cannot be considered "unbias" or "neutral."
4)Even when referring to the word "Destruction" there is an obvious misinformation. The writer cannot take Christianity as the "measuring stick" in order to understand a new movement like Brahma Kumaris. If the writer looks up in the dictionary the world destruction, it means:an event (or the result of an event) that completely destroys something also: a final state; That is not the word to use when someone is aware that matter cannot be created neither destroyed (first law of thermodynamics)and that according to BK knowledge the world will continue on as it always has, thus there is no destruction but rather transformation. To say "I am using destruction as the Christians use it: Armagedon" is not writing in a neutral language but rather biased and opinionated languaage. 5) It would be good to know what the author believes gives him/her authority to write about an institution.This should be checked by WIKIPEDIA, otherwise; this site is merely a place to voice someone's opinion.
6) Religion is an experience. If you don't have the experience you will think that a particular faith is "worthless." Usually, the thought could not be "it was worthless for me" and thus there may be some others that may think the same and a group appears. Nevertheless, when writing an article for an "encyclopedia" these matters are overlooked. When a non-believer or non-supporter has "the pen" to write first, it would be very hard to come up to a "middle way." Perhaps something overlooked by WIKIPEDIA. In th meantime, an article such as this one may be hurting the image of an institution, thus assuring that the "non-believer" objective is attained.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.13.124 (talk • contribs)
- In response ;
- 1)There is no need to add a heading such as B.K.s beware!
- The above heading was added in response to a B.K.W.S.U. supporter who more than once re-wrote the article to read like an advert for the organization. This is not the purpose of the Misplaced Pages
- 2)There are links which ... point to groups that are non Brahma Kumaris related.
- By which you mean the links to ex-Brahma Kumari or Prajapita Brahma Kumari websites? I think that you will find both have relationships with the B.K.W.S.U., are fair sources of information supporting the article and provide an NPOV element.
- 3)There is obvious misinformation about the knowledge
- Well, be specific here and discussion in detail. Misinformation or information that the B.K.W.S.U. would rather not have made public?
- 4)Even when referring to the word "Destruction" there is an obvious misinformation.
- There is a difference between "Destruction" and ' misinfomation '. The B.K. meaning of "Destruction" has been clarified on the page following your comments. If you are a practising B.K. or ex-B.K. you will know fine that "Destruction" is the word that the B.K.W.S.U. generally uses for the allegedly soon to come Armageddon. It may not suit your nor the B.K.'s P.R. purposes for this to be made widely public but it is referred to as such in the B.K.W.S.U. and the referenced literature.
- Quote from the BrahmaKumaris.com HQ's own website, " Dada witnessed in his vision the destruction ... no escape. The wail of horror, the rivers of blood and pus, the panic and the desperation, and then, the final death. The silent aftermath. Dada, who had never shed a tear, was weeping now. “Oh, God, please stop this, please stop this!” he cried. “What a terrible destruction! "
- 5)what the author authority to write about an institution.
- A browser and an internet connection. Welcome to the Misplaced Pages ...
- 6) Religion is an experience.
- Religion, and religious experience is also based on doctrine and dogma. Here we have a fairly consclusive, exhaustive and objective reporting of the B.K.W.S.U. doctrine, dogma and practises. By all means, make your suggestions, and provide references, for which items are incorrect but appreciate that the Wiki is not an advert for your sect.
- 195.82.106.244 16:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
your article is not neutral
NPOV dispute
In response:
1)ANSW: So by doing that you expect that no one will re-write it? are you afraid? what is your interest in defaming BK?
2)ANSW: what do you mean both have relationship with BK? If you quit, there is no relationship. Quitting means "out, gone".
3)ANSW: dinousaurs 2500 years ago? I wonder if you make a distinction between knowledge from the "Murli" or any opinion whether from BKs or non-BKs things which anyone like yourself could talk about? Is this aspect in your Bibliography? there are more things but one at the time...
4)ANSW: So the page says destruction. There was a war, thus destruction happens. However, the earth will not be destroyed nor the human race. Is this destruction, "armageddon" as you pointed out? Obviously there is no such a thing as armageddon for BK knowledge and as you explained that is the way you used the word to be understood. Thus, If there is no armageddon and that is what you meant when you say "destruction" then there is a problem when using this word. As I said before, logically, reasonably the proper use is "transformation" specially when you are talking about change of ages (Iron to Golden.)
5)ANSW:Just like you can write, anyone else can.. then why are you so worried about changes in this page? what is your interest behind people reading what you write? What is your interest in creating a page for Brahma Kumaris in wikipedia? Hope you answer all of these questions.
6)ANSW:Once you have an experience, there is no need to base that on anything. You see, experiences are not based on intellectual knowledge alone. What is the difference between "sect" and "religion"? You obviously interchange both loosely when you refer to BK. Finally an article cannot be neutral when you have strong feelings against someone.
BTW, there is no need to let me know that mi IP address could be blocked. FYI there is something called DHCP. Best Wishes and Pure feelings. 70.119.13.124 18:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- The Brahma Kumaris teach that Creation exists of a single, constantly repeating 5,000 year cycle or Kalpa. That there is no time longer ago than 5,000 years. There is a fair amount of evidence to suggest that dinosaurs once walked the Earth. So when in the last 5,000 years did the dinosaurs live? Did they live in the Paradise of Golden Age 5,000 years ago or 2,500 years ago at the beginning of the Copper Age?
- The Misplaced Pages states ; " Armageddon refers generally to end times or giant catastrophes in various religions and cultures. It may also refer to any great loss of life in battle or use of weapons of mass destruction. " This is precisely the as the B.K.W.S.U. gives to " Destruction ".
- Added quote from B.K.W.S.U. teaching poster called, " Truth about The Creator and His Creation by Most Beloved World God Father Shiva Kalpa (5,000 years) Ago. " ; " ... the Iron Aged irreligious world destroyed through Shankar by goading Yadvas ". See ; .
- 195.82.106.244 21:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
70.119.13.124 00:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Baba has not talked about dinosaurs. I have my own theory. This is about the knowledge of Brahma Kumaris not about what you think or what I think. This is a proof of how "neutral" your article is. Also, check the use of the word entropy. You are not using it properly when you talk about the ages. and last but no least...(more to come) please don't use "wikipedia" to support your statements. Misplaced Pages is not a primary source. Students in higher Ed. institutions are not allowed to use Misplaced Pages. If you want serious support of what you say use something which is backed up by academia.
Evident Bias in this article
According to WIKIPEDIA "A bias is a prejudice in a general or specific sense, usually in the sense of having a predilection for one particular point of view or ideology. One is said to be biased if one is influenced by one's biases. A bias could, for example, lead one to accept or not-accept the truth of a claim, not because of the strength of the claim itself, but because it does or does not correspond to one's own preconceived ideas." http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:NPOV
This article fits clearly in this category. There are many questions which have not been answered. Please check Bibliography. It is not pertinent to the body of the article. I have read myself most of those books. Please check form of language used for this article.
Bias
1.Language is biased.
2.Author of this article considers Raja yoga as "spirit channeling."
3.Author expresses view in a non neutral language: Sat Yuga for "its faithful followers."
4.Author expresses: "Lekhraj Kripalani attracted mostly women." Non neutral view. It should say "the movement attracted ..."
5.The author writes:"The version made more vague and palatable to Westerners is found here." This is clearly an opinion.
6."Multi-million dollar registered " educational " charity that does not distribute aid outside of its operations." Recently Brahma Kumaris gave monetary aid to the victims of the devastation in Tsunami in Sri Lanka. There is clear misinformation in order to hurt BK image.
7."Followers are taught that if they make spiritual efforts by getting rid of the 5 vices and only they, Brahma Kumars and Kumaris will live in the coming Golden Aged paradise." BK is an open university anyone is welcome in their classes. There is no need to write "and only they." BK is open to everyone.
8.Donations are generally not accepted from non-B.K.s as their money is considered as " impure ". WRONG. There are plenty of donations from outsiders which at one time or another have taken benefit from different classes or workshops. The author clearly pretends to create animosity with his sarcastic phrase.
9."B.K.s were instructed not to do general social work nor perform what is generally understood as charity." See Tsunami in Sri Lanka. Your sentence is misinformed, bias and non-neutral.
10. Author has made deep mistakes in the aspects of knowledge as well, which have not been corrected.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.13.124 (talk • contribs)
- 1. Give specific examples
- 2. See definition of spirit channeling and relate that to what Lekhraj Kripalani and Gulzar Dadi did / do and explain why that is not channeling. The argument is not if some spirit is being channelled but what or which spirits are being channelled. BKWSU will claim that those spirits that are being channelled are God, Shiva and/or Lekhraj Kripalani. It is not possible to imperically state whether those spirits that are being channelled are actually God, Shiva and/or Lekhraj Kripalani.
- Many would not even consider that such a thing as a soul, spirit or channeling exists. But, on the presumption that some kind of phenomenon does exist and that phenomenon is called channeling, this is what is going on inside the BKWSU. channeling it is said takes two basic forms ; firstly, the " total possession " type form where the channelled entity takess complete control over the victim or accomplice's body ; secondly, where the entity's "energy" or "vibrations" are channelled through an individual who remains conscious and in control. This is what is being taught and practiced within BKWSU. Not yoga as most individuals understand it. This is not what the BKWSU tell individuals what is happening nor that they are being prepared to be used in such a way. But it is what they are doing, as you well know.
- 3. " Satyuga is being prepared for you, my faithful children ". BKWSU philosophy states that at some point within the next 30 years, the world population will be reduced from in excess of 6 Billion at present to just 900,000 of which will all be exceptional Raja Yoga / Shiva Baba followers. These - and only these Raja Yoga followers - are the individuals that will inherit the Golden Age, Heaven on earth. No Christians, Mohammedans, Buddhists, Jehovah Witnesses will . Can you quote the Murli points that contradict this?
- 4. In the begining there was no movement only Lekhraj Kripalani. Without Lekhraj Kripalani, what else was there to be attracted to. He was after all to become Krishna ] and the women followers were called his Gopis. See the bibliography.
- 5. Explain the differnces then. Most individuals would see the Westernerized version as whitewash hiding the truth.
- 6. Please provide financial reports to establish what propoprtion over what years has been given outside of the organization. As a registered charity, these account are actually in the public domain already. It would appear that for most of its 70 years existence, it has been specific policy for BK followers not to give to any charity other that the organisation itself nor to do any other charitable work, other than the work of the organization again.
- 7. The point being that the BKWSU teach " only they, Brahma Kumars and Kumaris, will live in the coming Golden Aged paradise ". Anyone can come, but only those individuals born again as BKs will inherit the coming Golden Aged paradise. It would seem that you are obfuscating the point.
- 8. Similar obfucation, define " plenty ". Have those that " taken benefit " now become BKs? Provide substantiation by way of accounts. The Maryadas used to be quite clear, but perhaps, like " end of the world " and world population predications, they have changed too. In the manner that " God states that the population of the world is fixed at 5.5 Billion but the number keeps being re-edited by the organization as actually population grows.
- 9. " One swallow does not a summer make ". Aristotle. The quotation as it stands has been the organization's policy for most of its history. To an outsider, it looks fairly clear that what the organization considers " service " or " charity " is actually its own evangelism or P.R.. Again, please provide institutional records to contradict rather than your own POV.
- 10. Be specific. Itemize your criticisms. Provide evidence to the contrary.
- Perhaps you can answer the question why the BKWSU organization does not openly publish its God's doctrines, in their original and edited forms, so that impartial observers can make their own deducations. Unfortunately, too many of the unpublished " doctrines " do exist in the public domain and it clearly states that non-BKs are " devillish " and our intellects are too " impure " to understand them. What are we to make of this and why does the organization not just come clean?
- 195.82.106.244 23:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- 1)ANSW: See 2, 3 and 4 above. The whole article is about negativity towards BK. Any further proof?
- There is a difference between objective and negative. The article may not be the P.R. exercise you would wish for but it is as close to objective fact at the BKWSU allows given its unwillingness over the last 25 years or more to put into the public domain its original and re-edited " scriptures ".
- 2)ANSW: It is not about the definition. It is about what you wrote: "Teachers of a form of meditation, or spirit channelling." Certainly, teachers do not teach "spirit channeling." It is pretty hard to write a non bias article when neutrality is not in your mind.
- There is a difference in what Brahma Kumaris say and what Brahma Kumaris do. And even what Brahma Kumaris understand that they are doing. Are they not channelling their God's energy through them into this impure world? Do they not tell us Gulzar Dadi's body is being possessed by the spirits of Shiva and Brahma and those possessing spirits talking and acting through it?
- 3)ANSW: "" Satyuga is being prepared for you, my faithful children "" this is certainly different than " "" Satyuga is being prepared for you, my faithful "and only you" BK truthful children. " " You need to remember that every single soul is a child of God. These types of misunderstandings make your article a false representation of the BK movement.
- Non sequitor. It does not follow. Every human being may be a child of their own God. BKWSU teach that only Brahma Kumaris and Brahma Kumaris will reincarnate in heaven on earth, all other human beings will reincarnate in a Hell on earth.
- 4)ANSW:When you are talking about OM Mandali, you need to express a movement not an individual. He wasn't Krishna then and He is not Krishna right now.
- It depends on whether " Krishna " is used as a name or a description, e.g the all attractive one. Lekraj's followers are referred to as his Gopis.
- 5)ANSW:There is a big difference. Any global corporation will adjust its presentation according to the culture. Not everyone in the world is Hindu. When you say "most individuals would see" who are they? do you have proof? otherwise, is just talk.
- So we present both and let the readers decide for themselves. Agreed.
- 6)ANSW:Actually, YOU are the one who needs to provide that information before writing it. How do you back up that info? Otherwise, you can write that "movement X has trillions of dollars and they will not share it with all the poor people in the world." Proof please.
- UK Charity Commissioners, 2002. " Total income was £2,855,758, total expenditure only £630,673, donations to other charities/causes £ 0. " That is just one country. Not bad for an organization that has little inthe way or products and does not charge for its services. Figures from India please. Should be Purchasing power parity adjusted.
- 7)ANSW: Again, BK is open to anyone. It is on you if you want to feel a part or not. You see there are no BKs who have received a "membership card" with Gold Age privileges. Clear misunderstanding of the knowledge.
- If it is true that the BKWSU is open to anyone, why to they ban individuals as reported on P.B.K. websites? Again, this is double talk and misleading P.R. and the Misplaced Pages is not the place to discuss it. There is a difference between an organization wanting to attract members and considering those individuals to be " card carrying " Brahmins. But the BKWSU specifically states that ONLY BKWSU Brahmins will inherit the Golden Age. If the BKWSU is happy to make public copies of their hidden scriptures, I am happy to mark quotation with dates. Enough of these do exist in the public domain and on the referenced websites to substantiate this point.
- 8)ANSW: You wrote this in your bias article: "In many countries, especially in the West, the Brahma Kumaris have introduced lightweight versions of their meditation courses designed to capitalize on the interest in New Age, positive thinking or personal growth movements which introduce basic elements of their faith and practice but avoid detailed and controversial instruction. Often these courses focus on specific interest groups such as women, business people, teachers and so on."
- Those are the ones who donate monies after the programs. You contradict yourself, my friend.
- So, the BKWSU advertises free courses but accept donations for them from non-followers. Can you give us evidence of this and the proportion of income raised in this manner?
- 9)ANSW: I showed you one case. A large case BTW. This excludes the sentence "they do not do it." You need to investigate further before you write something. Your language is not accurate.
- More evidence please. it probably came about because for such a wealth organisation not to have given at that time would have been very bad P.R. for them but it is a new - and perhaps one off - development so cannot be said to be a trend or policy - unless, of course, so published. Why would the BKWSU give money to individuals that were just going to go off eat meat, drink alcohol and have sex? Were the " gifts " conditional?.
- 10) There are some questions that you have decided not to answer above. At least you should answer all of them. Otherwise it is just a "power game". When I point out that "entropy" is not being used correctly, you do not take care it. That makes me wonder if you really know what you are writing about. The Iron age cannot be the "lowest" entropy. It is the opposite. Now you know. Remember the dinosaurs above? have you taken care of that?... If you have not realized God, If you are unable to recognize God, to feel God, to have an experience with God..how can the murli benefit you?
- Which aspect of entropy do you wish to discuss and what is its relevance here? Your science is being judged here and it does not suggest that you are qualified in this area. Any discussion of what entropy is ought to be done on the respective pages and new concepts put through scientific peer review.
- You should write objectively " If you have not realized god, if you are unable to recognize god, to feel god ... how can benefit you ". The impartial response would be, make them all public in original and recently editing form, and let the academics and people decide.
- The BKWSU have latched on to a simplistic understanding of entropy, as a kind of buzzword, understood to mean a decline from an ordered state to a disordered state and they clearly apply this to human and world evolution. The BKs teach , turning evolution upside down to current scientific understanding, that human civilisation started 5,000 years ago in a pure, ordered and evolved Golden Age then declined to an impure, disorder, uncivilised Hell today. . To my knowledge, not once in the organization's 70 years have they put forward a scientific paper to substantiate this position and yet continue to teach it as fact at the core of their belief system to 100,000s of largely uneducated individuals. The problem being that the BKWSU teach that all the best scientific minds of this world are " impure and devillish " and to re-write this is to re-write the teaching of their god .
- It is clear to me that your negativity towards BK is very high. At least remember to send good wishes and good feelings to ALL... how come you don't write that BK teaches this? Best Wishes and Pure Feelings for you.
- 70.119.13.124 01:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- Why do you call objectivity negativity? Why not just be honest and state that you are a representative of this organization, that you do not like that clear, objective facts about the organizations teachings and activities are being made public? Is honesty not a virtue, or does the " Celestial Art of Hiding and Revealing " come first in your organization's book?
- The ball is in your court to give up the petty insults and come up with a burden of evidence to contradict the reported points, see, ] . Response in bold ; 195.82.106.244 09:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
There is no change in the form of this article
Well, after pointing out mistakes, bias, non neutrality and bad faith from the author of this article, still no a single word has been changed. The author of this article even feel "insulted." Sir, I am concerned about you. Even, when you contradict yourself many times and still defend yur view point. The verifiability link you sent me clearly shows that your article does not comply with its requirements :
"Information on Misplaced Pages must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed."
Your Bibliography certainly does not point out to your own descriptions. You are basing your "facts" in what you have experienced in the UK. The UK is not the the whole BK. There is more to it. Your experiences does not make it a fact. Your proofs do not contain an official document, it is just stuff you are writing. Please see that. Their is no encyclopedia who will write in bias language such as: "their God." They would do it in a more appropriately way such as: " They be lieve that God.... etc. It would surprise me if you take the time to fix these bias. BTW, how about the dinosaurs? Did you fix that? (third time) now I will concentrate on your comments:
Which aspect of entropy do you wish to discuss and what is its relevance here? Your science is being judged here and it does not suggest that you are qualified in this area. Any discussion of what entropy is ought to be done on the respective pages and new concepts put through scientific peer review
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.13.124 (talk • contribs)
- Just to clarify " Your science ", the article for deletion on the topic Cyclical Time, , was written by the above contributor alone and this editor had no involvement in its creation. I have never contributed on scientific matters
- The article has been deleted by overwhelming consensus.
- Dinosaurs. OK. The BK World Spiritual University teach that time or Creation exists as a 5,000 year cycle. There is no mention of their existing in " Heaven " on earth. In your opinion, when during that cycle do they teach dinosaurs existed?
- " Their god " is actually very common construction in English. Try checking with Google.com. The specific point being made here is that the BKWSU teach that they are unique representatives of " God ", in that " God " comes in person only to them, and teaches these concepts reported. Other experts or monotheistic religions might not agree that this is the " One God " they share, nor that these teachings are " God's " teachings. Pantheists might agree that it is " a " god, one of many. And so hence, " their God " is accurate.
The World Cycle
First, there is no such a thing as "my science." And as you poined out, I am qualified to write anything I want as long as I have a browser and internet connection... Welcome to WIKIPEDIA... As you can see there are a couple of reasonable individuals who wanted to keep the topic. I cannot ask someone who is not up -to-date with scientific knowledge to judge the topic, but again they have an internet connection and a browser too and one or two degrees and I guess that qualifies them to judge, right?
Let me try one more time. The Wesrtern world believes time is linear. There are 2 main theories which explain the origin of the universe. Creationism and "Big Bang" which is supported by evolutionist. Curiously, a priest playing scientist is the one who came up originally with this theory which later was supported by others, however you can read in detail about this here:http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bang.html
However, to be able to explain about "origins" you need to be able to talk about TIME. In the case of the "Big Bang" no one cares what happened few seconds after the explosion, but what was there before and WHY?. Can the big bang explain this? Here is where the concept of God creating the world fits rather nicely (for religious purposes aka science.) However, we have a couple of problems: The first law of thermodynamics does not agree with it and there is no "cause and effect" behind it. When you look at this in a logical, reasonable way, you will see that linear time fails to explain the origin in a logical fashion. However, a "cycle" offers the solution. The question "who is first, the chicken or the egg" is resolved. The 3 aspects of time are there, cause and effect are there and most importantly the first law of thermodynamics fits this description. Do you see that?
There are some scientific problems which are also resolved by using the cycle model.One of them is the problem of the "arrow of time." which it was fully explained in the topic of cyclic time. Einstein model of the universe is also an "sphere" and the universe must be finite, according to theory of relativity. Time warps, he pointed out.
If the first law of thermodynamics takes place, then the second law must do so. Here the concept of entropy must be understood. As matter changes from "orderly" to "disorderly" (those are not the right words used by scientists now) entropy tend to become HIGHER. (Thus the IRON AGE is a state of higher entropy, disorderly, see? the Golden age , lower entropy) This concept is clearly explained with the Chinese philosophy of Ying-Yang or dualism in matter. Up to this point, any questions? Do you see this by using logic alone, reasoning alone? Please bear in mind that "a straight line" is non existent in nature. The shortest distance between 2 points is a "geodesic" a curve. We live in a sphere after all. Thus, what is the support for the concept of "linear time"?
Finally western scientists are not the only scientists.. and logic and reason are extremily powerful. After all, we are Souls. 70.119.13.124 14:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- * Your artical on Cyclical Time was deleted by consensus, . Please find somewhere else to debate this, perhaps specific pages regarding the scientific concepts you quote. This article is about the BKWSU and what it teaches.
- * There is no debate that the BKWSU that time is cycical.
- * It is agreed that the BKWSU, and its " God ", teaches their followers that time is cycle and exists in one single 5,000 year cycle. It is not the purpose of this article, nor one might argue the Misplaced Pages, to decide whether this concept is true, only to decide whether it is easily verifiable by any individual that it is true that the BKWSU teach this.
- * I have provided several very good, direct and easily verifiable sources - on the topic page and discussion - to confirm that the BKWSU does teach cyclical time, 5,000 years and " Destruction " of the world.
- 195.82.106.244 10:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Destruction
Just to clarify that the use of the word, " Destruction " is accurate in this context as it is the word used by the founder and organization.
THe following is a quote from the spirit entity the BKs call their " God ", channelled through the spiritualistic medium of Lehkraj Lekhraj Kripalani. Knowns as a " sakar murli ", that is a scripture spoken through Lekhraj Kripalani. It was re-edited by senior members of the BKWSU and republished internationally within the organization dated 30.05.06, to be read to all members at the daily morning class ;
- " ... The intellect says that we have come out of the Iron Age. Baba has come...... Children know that when our study is completed then the destruction will take place. Destruction is certainly going to take place. There are some among you who know this. If it is understood that the world is going to be destroyed then one will start preparing for the new world. One will make ready the baggage. There is a little time left. We should become Baba's children . Even if anyone has to die of hunger, it will be first Baba and then children ."
- .
As verifiable material, I think this clears up the matter of the use of the word " Destruction. Withing the BKWSU, use of the word " Destruction " has given it a specific meaning that is used here, e.g. the guarantied death of over 5.1 Billion human beings the destruction of world civilisation as it stands and the " disappearing " of all other land masses on the globe, except India.
This is what contributor Riveros11 using IP addresses 70.119.13.124, and indeed the BK organization externally, euphemistically calls " Transformation ". I hope that this closes the matter and draws attention to the intent and integrity of the BK contributor. 195.82.106.244 10:23, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Not that Fast
Please do not change the tag Template:TotallyDisputed, This matter has not been settled yet. (that is why I am still writing here, and btw, you will see me here often) I disagree with your article form, intent and objectivity. You quote BK knowledge when it fits your interest and some other times you quote your own understanding or what you heard. As a matter of fact even though, I pointed out that what you write is not BK Knowledge, you just disregard my points altogether. Also, I want to make clear that I do not represent Brahma Kumaris, so don't start "interpreting" things. I am writing here as user Riveros11 and that is what I represent. Unfortunately, you decided to mask or hide yourself behind an IP address, wihtout a suitable user name. This is a proof that you are perhaps afraid of people knowing your identity. It is easy to write anything you want in that way right?. Throwing the rock and hiding the hand...
You keep on talking about "destruction" I thought this was settled long ago. Again about destruction: You keep on changing the meaning, from Armageddon and its definition to what you think BK believes destruction is to some quoted sentences which as far as I am concerned they can be made up by you. You have not presented any bona fide information or document which supports your arguments.
The objective view of the word destruction is the dictionary word: "end state." This you can verify. Now, the world cannot be destroyed because according to BK knowledge there is an eternal cycle. This is logic. To verify this, see the first law of thermodynamics. This is reasonable, logical, rational. I know you just want to concentrate on this word, but you are ignoring that there are plenty of flaws in your article. When are you going to correct those? 70.119.13.124 16:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- I presented the quotation with significant enough references that you can go check it to see if it is true. This was in addition to references to the BK published poster that clearly states " Destruction ".
- Once you have, come back and provide equivalently verifiably sources to suggest that the BKWSU have publically stated that there is going to be no " Destruction ", that 5.1 Billion + humans are not going to die to make way for their Golden Age, that there is going to be no Nuclear Holocaust, that all the other continents of the planet are not going to sink below the oceans and that only India will remain. If you can do so, I will go and verify them.
- Otherwise, the statements stand as they are. You seem to be the only one disputing them. We and the BKWSU are in agreement.
- The Laws of Thermodynamics state that ; the increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added to the system by heating, plus the amount added in the form of work done on the system, it is impossible to obtain a process that, operating in cycle, produces no other effect than the subtraction of a positive amount of heat from a reservoir and the production of an equal amount of work and as temperature approaches absolute zero, the entropy of a system approaches a constant. I don't see the immediate relevence to this topic, discussion regarding Laws of Thermodynamics ought be had on the thermodynamics page not here.
- 195.82.106.244 18:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, just wanted to add that there are many people who have edited this article, so there's no need for such passionate discourse(unless you enjoy it) I myself was a long time bk, i was surrendered and a teacher who regularly read the murli in morning class, and i sincerly believe on the whole that this article is a very accurate representation of what the BKs are about, the knowledge and it's definitions are accurate. Maybe it's just the pr information you take issue with? I also know about this as i was also directly involved with the task of presenting the organisation in a favourable light to the public........what large organisation wouldn't have such concerns?
- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Green108 (talk • contribs)
- Thanks. FYI, green108, please sign your contributions by typing 4 " tildas " at the end of your post. I.e. 4 of the ~ mark. The mark that is generally created by typing " alt-n ", or similar, according on your keyboard and operating system. You can even copy and paste them into place. This will automatically leave a date and time stamp on your gratefully received contribution.
- In this manner, hopefully we can come to some consensus about statements by the above contributor and move forward. They seem to be the only one arguing against the facts are presented and their argument is, in my humble opinion, dangerously close to crapflood from a troll. .
- 195.82.106.244 18:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Article have been improving but there is a lot to be desired
Dear Green108: Thank you for your input. I respect your viewpoint, specially coming from an unbias setting. This article have been modified quite a bit from dinosaurs to entropy... and perhaps your input was needed. Nothing good can happen out of bad feelings as you know. It is obvious to me that the writer of this article demonstrates his feelings throughout. You wrote as if "you were" a BK, but I don't sense that animosity as the author of this article has towards BK. That makes a big difference. If you feel it reads ok, let it be... until someone else doesn't think so... Om Shanti.
Suggested edit for introductory sentence
Hi Everyone,
The article current begins:
Teachers of a form of meditation, or spirit channelling, called Raja Yoga .
Speaking as a former member, I think this is a bit broad.
BKs specifically teach to maintain contact with God, in which one remains as an active individual, in contrast with channeling where the emphasis is on the self disappearing, where one becomes a vehicle for expression of The Other.
I suggest:
Teaches a form of meditation called Raja Yoga that emphasizes contact with a Supreme Being and awareness of self as spirit as the primary method of purifying oneself.
Will edit following any discussion here.
Duality Rules 05:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Copyediting
I spent a fair amount of time the other day copyediting this article, correcting erroneous word usage, punctuation, and spacing -- without changing the substance of the article -- and was unhappy to see that all this work was undone by some editor who apparently does not understand the correct usage of English. I have re-placed the {{cleanup-copyedit}} tag on the article because there is still much work to be done fixing these issues. This is not an issue about the content of the article, but simply about correct English usage. --Russ Blau (talk) 19:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I am very sorry, it was me who changed it back, not because of your editing, but because some idiot decided to remove some of the links without raising any issue here in the discussion. I am so fed up of bks coming on here trying to hijack this article for their ends, and I have re written links so many times i did just re instate the whole article out of frustration. The fool had also removed a whole paragraph.
I apologise again, I didn't mean to undo whatever good work was done, but this does get a bit infuriating after a while Green108 18:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC) Green 108
Category: